Retouching negatives with pencil?

[BetterSense]

I would like to experiment with retouching negatives, and not having any easy source of red dye, I would like to start with just using number 2 pencil. I seem to remember reading that this was an accepted negative retouching technique. Is there any special touch to it? I haven't really read about retouching in the photo books that I have, such as the Ansel Adams trio. I guess he didn't do retouching?

I was looking through my dad's 60s-70s era auto mechanics book, and the pictures all have a clearly retouched look to them. My old motorcycle manuals also had heavily retouched B&W pictures of the mechanical parts. I didn't understand what it was that was different about these pictures until I recently realized that they must have been retouched for emphasis of the individual parts in the picture. Is it possible to do this kind of retouching with pencil?

[Robert Hall]

One can use spotting dyes on negatives as well. As for the pencil, this is possible but difficult.

If it is for larger areas, you might try using the pencil on a piece of vellum over the top of the negative on a light table. Then put the negative in the carrier with a piece of white plexy over the neg and the velum on top of the plexy making a kind of mask.

Some people tape the negative to the plexy on the underneath side and the tape the velum on top. If that makes sense.

I use the velum myself to make shading masks, but for touch up, I have some spotting dyes as well as red dye. The red dye is quite old but I think it can still be found, probably just not from Kodak.

[Drew Wiley]

Some kinds of film have a better retouching surface or more "tooth" than others on the back side. Real slippery films like TMax 100 and Delta 100 aren't very cooperative. Red dye is easier to use in such cases. If you can locate a single bottle of it, it will
probably last a lifetime.

[Robert Hall]

I believe you can find the red dye here....

Crocein Scarlet Dye

http://cgi.ebay.com/CROCEIN-SCARLET-DYE-1-OUNCE-photo-retouching-/310090916291?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item4832dbe1c3

[Mark Woods]

My mother used to retouch the negs in my dad's studio in Hollywood. She worked on the base side where the neg had "tooth." Not sure if they're still manufactured that way now. She used light table that was like a small A frame easel. There was a powerful magnifying glass she could position. The lit area could be rotated in any direction. I used to have one of these, but it's long gone now.

Good luck.

[Daniel Stone]

"Adams" retouching machines come up for sale on ebay from time to time.

check craigslist.org too. A friend of mine has one, and uses it quite a bit, especially to justify the price tag($10 and had to drive 50mi each way to pick it up from an old-school studio closing down a few years back).

easy to make one too. just use one of the tracing tables(or a larger lightbox) and some red watercolor on the base side. or use some of the red-scarlet stuff mentioned above.

retouching's an art in itself IMO, manual negative retouching that is. PS is dead-easy with the clone-stamp tool :)

-Dan

[Harold_4074]

If you are referring to the "highlighting" of edges in pictures of mechanical things, that would be relatively easy to do with pencil--assuming that you have a 4x5 or larger negative (it is possible on medium format, but a lot harder). A draftsman's lead holder along with a piece of folded sandpaper (for pointing the lead) and you are in business.

There was at one time (I'm pretty sure it is discontinued now) a Kodak product which contained some sort of index-matched abrasive in a fast-drying lacquer. It was wiped onto the back side of conventional film to give enough "tooth" for pencil work. You can do a slight amount of pencil work on the emulsion side (not recommended--mistakes are pretty much irreversible) but pencil just won't take on glossy film base.

Incidentally, many of those old Popular Mechanics pictures were probably retouched with a brush and dye, because the pencil point dulls too rapidly if there is a lot to be done. Where pencil really shines is in removing facial blemishes on portraits...

There's nothing magical about Crocein Scarlet if you aren't doing large areas, where you want to be able to see and print through it. Spotone, or even diluted ink, work for jobs that pencil would do.

[Drew Wiley]

The dye is pretty damn easy to use because, dilute, you can layer it up bit by bit to
the point where it's virtually seamless. With pencil, you have to be a little more careful
as you build up. Or just tape in register a sheet of frosted mylar, which is easier to
retouch than film base. Creosin dye can also be easily removed if necessary. Certainly
easier in many cases than Photoshop, which requires a scan first. Don't be intimidated.

[BetterSense]

The dye is pretty damn easy to use because, dilute, you can layer it up bit by bit to
the point where it's virtually seamless. With pencil, you have to be a little more careful
as you build up. Or just tape in register a sheet of frosted mylar, which is easier to
retouch than film base. Creosin dye can also be easily removed if necessary. Certainly
easier in many cases than Photoshop, which requires a scan first. Don't be intimidated.

I guess I should look into the dye. I had anticipated it being hard to apply the dye so that the edges of the application weren't obvious, but I guess it's easier than I had imagined to 'feather' the stuff out. I also thought it was irreversible, but I guess not.

[Drew Wiley]

I just clean off the dye if necessary with ordinary film cleaner. And it can be diluted
any amount you wish, and layers up between dry coats without lifting the previous
coat, so can be applied with considerable subtlety. Just use decent spotting or watercolor brushes. This is a big adavantage over pencil or even neutral dyes, although those kinds of tools are helpful for minor spotting problems. One option I dislike, however, are retouching lacquers. These allow one to provide a convenient amount of tooth to otherwise slick film surfaces, and are still available from art suppliers, but are irreversible and distinctly unhealthy to work with.

[Jay DeFehr]

I think TXP has retouching surfaces on both sides. I too want to learn retouching. I never considered trying to retouch 4x5; I think 8x10 will be challenging enough for me.

[Drew Wiley]

The bigger the film, the easier it is, because of generally less magnification in the
final print. That is one reason why the old-timers sometimes shot portraits on 11x14 instead of 8x10 film, even when they were enlarging. And traditional films like TXP
and HP5+ typically have the best retouching surfaces. I wouldn't call myself much
of a retoucher. I do it to get rid of blemishes or like minor auromatic dodging and burning. But there are also aspects of this useful to corrective masking in color
printing too.

[jnantz]

you can retouch txp without a problem, i used to all the time ..
grain is your friend ...

take your pencil ( is it a wooden pencil or in a lead-holder? )
get a few leads a 2 a 3 and a 4 ... depending on the tooth of the film one might
work and the others might not ...
and take some emry paper really fine grit. fold the paper in half so it is a square
and the sand is on the inside ... put the pencil lead in there,
and sharpen it running the paper on the lead so it is razor sharp
you want to sharpen about 1-2" of the lead. ( be careful you can stab yourself ! )
use a magnifier and lightly run the lead on the base side to mask
the shadow or blemish or ??
it takes a very light touch but once you have figured it out it is not too hard.
some people use figure 8's, some scratch marks, some swirls ..
figure out what works for you ...
make a contact print of the negative and see how it worked
you can wash the lead off and start again if you can notice your strokes ..
when you get very good, it is no problem enlarging to 16x20
you won't see any of your retouching strokes ...

have fun !
john

[PViapiano]

Alan Ross has a white plexi masking system on his website...take a look:

http://www.alanrossphotography.com/store/products-masking-vc-printing/

[Brian Stein]

It was common to also use a layer of varnish for films that have little tooth to improve this. If you google you should find a couple of venerable and ancient texts which give details on the recipes and process

[Louie Powell]

There is a technique called "dye dodging" that is related to what you want to do. Instead of crocein scarlet, it uses relatively common dyes available at many art supply stores - Dr. Martin's is the most common brand.

One trick from dye dodging that is generally useful - instead of applying the dye (or pencil) directly to the negative, attach a piece of unexposed, fixed and washed film to the negative with tape. This second negative should be applied on the back of the negative, but with it's emulsion side toward the negative. Then, apply the retouching on the back of the second negative. This approach avoids retouching the actual image negative, so if you don't like the results, you get another chance. And the fact that the retouching is separated from the image layer that you are focusing on when you make a print by two thicknesses of negative means that you have the effect of the retouching but without hard edges.

[PViapiano]

Chip Forelli had some great articles about dye dodging in Camera Arts many years ago.

[Vlad Soare]

The base of Tri-X 320 is indeed different from that of other films in regard to retouching. I tried to retouch Tri-X on the back side with a pencil, and I found it extremely easy. It was almost like drawing on paper. On other films the pencil simply slides on the glossy base without leaving anything more than a very faint trace.
Kodak used to sell a retouching fluid, which was smeared on the back of the film to make the pencil or dyes "take" better. I believe it's now discontinued. Does anybody know of anything else that could replace it? What was actually that fluid made of?

[Peter De Smidt]

Older books on retouching, as in books from the 30s, 40s and 1950s, often have good instructions on these types of retouching methods.

In one of my books on Hurrell, there's an unretouched picture of Joan Crawford along side the finished picture, which required 6 hours of pencil retouching.

[jnantz]

sometimes it was not just the negative that was retouched but the print as well.
print surfaces used to have a tooth to them as well which could be
scraped a little bit, and graphite dust ( from sharpened retouching pencils )
rubbed into the surface ( if it was too "hot" ) ...

maybe some of the european papers have a tooth to them
and allow for this sort of retouching ..

[CharlesWest]

Use a number 1 pencil or softer! You won't get any graphite on the negative with harder leads.

[Vlad Soare]

My pencils are numbered according to the European system, with 4B being the softest and 4H being the hardest (I believe the series goes all the way to 9, but 4 is the maximum I have). Which one is number 1? :confused:
I seem to be able to write on the back of the TXP with any of them, even with the 4H. On the other hand, on the back of any other negative none of them leaves much of a trace, not even the 4B. :(

Later edit: I've found more details here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pencil). It seems #1 is the B. Well, my B doesn't really work with anything but TXP. :(
It would be nice if we could find a replacement for the Kodak Retouching Fluid.

[Robert Hall]

Pencils here (the US) run from 9B ... 2B HB B F H 2H ... 9H, but they vary from company to company a bit as well.

[Drew Wiley]

Peter - my sister has a huge Hurrell print of Jane Russell, and it has all the signs of the
studio doing a masterful job of retouching the neg. Sometimes it's fun to encounter
some hole-in-the-wall bookstore on a rainy day and discover the old photo and graphic
guides from that era. Quite a few darkroom tricks have been forgotten.

[Vaughn]

I have a few Kodak Negative Retouching Pencils -- never tried them, but they seem relatively soft.

[jnantz]

don't add hardener in your fixer, it will make your
retouching a lot easier.

[RichardRitter]

Dose any one know of a source for the retouching lacquer?

[Robert Hall]

Don't know what that is, are you talking about the red dye? Or is this something different?

[RichardRitter]

Its also called retouching dope. You put it on negatives that do not have the tooth to take pencil retouching.

[Robert Hall]

Here are a few formulas:

#1

4 gr Sandarac (tree resin)
20 ml grain alcohol
1/2 ml chloroform
3 ml oil of lavender

(above sounds like a similar varnish I use on wet plate)

#2
Monkhoven's retouching varnish for negatives:

shellac is places in a saturated solution of ammonium carbonate for 24 hours.
The solution is then poured off and replaced by an equal amount of pure water and the fluid is boiled with constant stirring until the solution is complete.

The proportion of shellac to water should be 1:8

#3

2 grams Shellac
14 grams mastic
14 grams Sandarac
10 ml ether

Disolve resins in ether and add to 10ml of Benzole (Benzine and a Toluene mix, and good luck finding either. Toluene was/is used and a drug inhalant.)

And last but not least Janassens formula:

#4

10 gr Sandarac
2 gr Camphor
4 ml turpentine
3 ml oil of lavender
60 ml grain alcholol of specific gravity 0.83

Let it age for a day after use before retouching.

Please no one kill themselves with these mixtures. Fair warning :)

[John A]

I would like to experiment with retouching negatives, and not having any easy source of red dye, I would like to start with just using number 2 pencil. I seem to remember reading that this was an accepted negative retouching technique. Is there any special touch to it? I haven't really read about retouching in the photo books that I have, such as the Ansel Adams trio. I guess he didn't do retouching?

I was looking through my dad's 60s-70s era auto mechanics book, and the pictures all have a clearly retouched look to them. My old motorcycle manuals also had heavily retouched B&W pictures of the mechanical parts. I didn't understand what it was that was different about these pictures until I recently realized that they must have been retouched for emphasis of the individual parts in the picture. Is it possible to do this kind of retouching with pencil?

[John A]

Yes there is a Photo retouching fluid that must be applied to the emulsion side of negative and if you cant get from photo supplier then you can make it yourself,
Mix turpentine and Rosin. Rosin is what violin players use to prime the bow. In Europe it is called canifol. the ratio is 15 to 1. Powder Rosin first and mix well until solution is uniform
A drop is placed on negative, then gently spread with soft napkin over the work area only, not entire negative,and wiped off. Let it dry few minutes. This makes surface workable, yet does not affect translusance.
General rule is softer ( B, 2B) pencil for larger areas and Harder ( H, !H) pencil for smaller areas to work on.
I use Koh-I-Noor brand of pencils for their quality. Negative should be placed in an envelope with opening on both side, so you can see the light going through the negative and work on it. Envelope made of file folder will be Ideal Handle film in an envelope, not to leave fingerprints on film.
Pencil must be sharpened by hand, approx 1 1/2 to 2 inches of shave, 1 inch lead exposed, sanded with fine sand paper to gradually create a sharp needle point and finally and gently sanded again with 800 grit sandpaper.
Handle pencil with care.Do not press pencil on negative at all or the pencil will create a skid mark. Gently leaving fine layer of graphite is the ticket. Use fine, easy and gentle strokes, and remember, you are softening the shadows ( whiter on negative) not eliminating them.
Use of red dye can only do so much. It is most effective on Orthochromatic film. On Panchromatic film red die is useless.
Also. mask the easel in a way that the only light you see is the light going through negative. This is a slow process requiring patience but with a little practice you will do a wonderful job.

[Tim Meisburger]

Thanks John. That is great advice, and I'm going to give it a try as soon as I can. I just bought a box of TXP, so I should be able to work on th eback rather than emulsion side, but will set up a light table and use an envelop as you describe. Should be fun!

[Drew Wiley]

Most art stores still sell spray "tooth" for the smooth base of the film, whether camera film or drafting mylar, typically a fast-dry Krylon acrylic product nowadays, though some might still offer the stinky butyl acetate lacquer variety too. Hope I'm not simply repeating something I said earlier on this thread, but these new Kodak TMY as well as color neg sheet films have a deliberate tooth to help in scanning, which doubles as a decent retouch tooth. A lot has to do with the correct kind of pencil. Here again, a large art store helps. But I prefer to do any smudge or dye onto a registered piece of frosted mylar anyway, leaving the original
untouched.

[tgtaylor]

https://www.amazon.com/Modern-Retouching-Manual-Kitty-West/dp/B0006BR2FY

Thomas

[denverjims]

https://www.amazon.com/Modern-Retouching-Manual-Kitty-West/dp/B0006BR2FY

Thomas

With respect, Thomas, I noticed that this reference has a pub date in 1967. Were materials discussed/used still available or were you looking at this as mostly a reference on techniques?

I have found some "Multi Sepia Opaquer Retouching Pens" (0.05mm) in red with which I have had some success in retouching pinholes and small detail in negatives. Got them (they have the same in black) at FLS Discount Supplies (www.PCBsupplies.com). Not easy to use w/o magnifier, but patience pays...

Best, Jim

[Jac@stafford.net]

To repeat, pencils on a negative lighten the applied area.
Speak now of razors to darken areas.

Randy Moe, where are you? You and I have the tool.