Mounting Cyanotypes

[Pete Watkins]

I've done a bit of research on this and as long as I use an acid free mount board I can't seem to find a valid reason not to use my dry mount press.
Any opinions welcome.
Pete.

[jon.oman]

Good question. I would like to know the answer as well.......

[Mark Woods]

The collectors say it ruins the price of the photo. I rarely see any E Weston photos that aren't dry matted and trimmed to the edge of the image.

[tgtaylor]

I've done a bit of research on this and as long as I use an acid free mount board I can't seem to find a valid reason not to use my dry mount press.
Any opinions welcome.
Pete.

Not just any acid free board will do: It must be an acid free and unbuffered board (actually a little acid is ok). Same with the dry mounting tissue: Neutral PH or even slightly acid PH.

Thomas

[cyrus]

I've read that cyanotypes can fade over time but can be rejuvenated in a peroxide dip so permanently mounting them is probably not a good idea. Also, unlike regular prints, buffered will cause fading.

[Vaughn]

Actually, just putting them in the dark for awhile is suppose to rejuvenate them, too.

I would go with unbuffered rag board.

Vaughn

[Pete Watkins]

Thanks for all the good advice. I'll see what's available over here.
Pete.

[Vaughn]

Pete, I find that with my platinum/palladium prints (on heavy watercolor paper), that dry mounting is not needed to keep the prints flat. I just top hinge them behind the window.

You might wish to make a quick test with a reject print -- tear it in half and put half in the mount press for your normal time and temperature -- then compare it to the other half...just to see if there is any change due to temperature.

Vaughn

[tgtaylor]

Century has the right matt for Cyanotype here in the states but you will probably have to have it ordered from the distributor as most art supply houses stock the buffered matt board. I think it's called Museum Matt or something like thant. Color selection is limited to 3 or 4 colors but one is white.

Calcium Carbonate is normally used to buffer media acid free. However the Cyanotype disintegrates in an alkaline environment so you need a neutral PH paper, mounting board and adhesive if you dry mount. B&H here in the US sells a neutral PH dry mounting adhesive.

Finally, and from what I've read on it, Vaughn is correct in that if you see your Cyanotype begin to fade from display, just put it in a dark place for a little while and it pops right back.

Ain't they fun! I'm going to print one this week when the sun reappears.

Thomas

[Pete Watkins]

Thanks again. I have neutral hot mounting tissue (I've had it for a few years but never checked if it was neutral until yesterday). I can get Peterboro museum mountboard, not cheap. Some boards claim to have a neutral pH facing paper would this and the neutral mounting tissue protect the print from alkali damage? I can also obtain foam centre board with either acid free or 100% cotton rag face papers, would this be OK in my hot mounting press?
Thanks for your patience,
Pete.

[Pete Watkins]

Thomas, they're great but we can't rely on the sun here so it's the good old UV lights.
Pete.

[Vaughn]

The mounting tissue will act as a barrier between the mat board and the cyanotype, so you could probably use any matboard you wanted to with little or no problems.

[tgtaylor]

Maybe. But if you like the image enough to mount it you'll be better off to mount it on a 100% neutral PH rag board and not have to worry about it.

BTW, are you using in-camera negatives or digital negatives for your cyanotypes? I've been using in-camera negatives but that means having to make two negatives of the same scene: one for alternative process and the other for regular silver. For 8x10that translates to about $8 to shoot each scene. Now that I have my Epson 2200 up and running I'm going to try making digital negatives so that I can work off just one negative processed for the silver gelatin image. Plus I have litterly thousands of negatives in various formats that I can revisit for alternative processing.

Thomas

[D. Bryant]

BTW, are you using in-camera negatives or digital negatives for your cyanotypes? I've been using in-camera negatives but that means having to make two negatives of the same scene: one for alternative process and the other for regular silver.



That's the beauty of pyro stained negatives, one negative can be used for silver gelatin and alt. processes.

[ROL]

I can also obtain foam centre board with either acid free or 100% cotton rag face papers, would this be OK in my hot mounting press?

I can't comment specifically about cyanotypes, but foam board in a dry mount press can be dicey. I would advise a low temperature tissue (perhaps ColorMount, if that can be used safely with your print), and testing first.

[tgtaylor]

That's the beauty of pyro stained negatives, one negative can be used for silver gelatin and alt. processes.

The cyanotype doesn't require a dense negative but I have been working on the Kallitype (the brown Vandyke in particular)which require a negative density range of 1.5 to 1.8.Really? Does normal development (i.e., not extended time) with pyro result in a negative density of 1.8?

Thomas

[Vaughn]

The cyanotype doesn't require a dense negative but I have been working on the Kallitype (the brown Vandyke in particular)which require a negative density range of 1.5 to 1.8.Really? Does normal development (i.e., not extended time) with pyro result in a negative density of 1.8?

Thomas

The color of the proportional staining of the negative (more silver -- more staining) is what gives the negatives the needed "density" (contrast) for alt processes. The yellow of the stain blocks some UV so that you not only have the native contrast due to the silver, but additional contrast provided by the staining.

Unless one's densitometer can measure the transmission of UV light, you will not be able to read the extra "density" caused by the stain.

When printing in silver gelatin on VC papers, the stain acts like a variable lower contrast filter -- lowering the contrast of the highlights (where there is more silver and thus yellow staining) in a greater amount than in the shadows and lower middle tones.

Thus one can use the negs for both alt and silver processes.

Vaughn

PS -- I work primarily in alt processes -- platinum/palladium and carbon. So sometimes I do make two 8x10 negs of a scene, one for each process. I print my pt/pd prints with no contrast agent, so the negs have a lot of contrast. If the neg has too much contrast for pt/pd, then I know I have a neg that will print well in carbon! A DR of 1.8? Carbon prints eats that wimpy DR for breakfast!

Film is cheap -- at least when compared to the rest of one's expenses (gas, food, etc) of a photo trip.

Below are a platinum print and a carbon print. The pt/pd neg was a one minute exposure and the neg for carbon was a two minute exposure (and got more development). Both are on FP4+ and were developed in a Jobo expert drum in Ilford PQ Universal developer.

Three Boys, Three Snags
New Years Day, 2008

[Pete Watkins]

Thomas, not digital, look up Gandolfis opinions on digi negs.
I use proper negs (4x5 up to 11x14 (not often) with a 6x9cm capability), 4x5 & 5x7 mostly. I like Foma, the 200 especially, and develop in D-76H 1-1, water stop and a neutral or alkali fix.
Thanks for the warning about foam board, I'll give that a miss.
I'm fairly happy with my cyanotypes on Arches Platine. For Arches Platine I need to travel to London, however I have three papers to try next (Arches Aquarelle, Saunders Waterford & Fabriano Artistico) all purchased in Birmingham. I also need to work on my brushing style.
Pete

[D. Bryant]

The cyanotype doesn't require a dense negative but I have been working on the Kallitype (the brown Vandyke in particular)which require a negative density range of 1.5 to 1.8.Really? Does normal development (i.e., not extended time) with pyro result in a negative density of 1.8?

Thomas

You will have to arrive at your own development times for pyro and their suitability for the alt. process you are interested in. But yes you can make pyro negs swing both ways.

How do you know what DR Kallitypes require? I assume you have printed a step tablet to determine that.

Pyro negs have an actinic density due to the stain. The same negative will can be printed on VC or single grade silver gelatin.

And you can probably make pyro stained negatives targeted for palladium work for carbon printing as well.

Also consider digital negatives as an alternative.

[D. Bryant]

Thomas, not digital, look up Gandolfis opinions on digi negs.

And what be that?


I use proper negs

What are proper negs?



I'm fairly happy with my cyanotypes on Arches Platine.
Generally speaking any paper suitable for palladium printing will work for cyanotype.


I also need to work on my brushing style.


Why?

[tgtaylor]

Great images guys!

I've read that the Kallitype requires a negative with a DR of 1.8 which would print on a zero grade paper. I don't have a densitometer and the image that I last posted
http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showpost.php?p=841636&postcount=1297I rotary developed for 10 minutes instead of the normal 7.75 minutes. However the resulting print lacked sufficient contrast which I corrected for in the above scan by boosting the contrast in PS. So last Sunday before the Super Bowl I drove down and re-shot it increasing the development time to 17 minutes. It's certainly a more contrasty negative and I'm planning to print it tomorrow now that the sun is back. One negative is still undeveloped in the holder pending the outcome.

Also this afternoon I stopped by a Blicks store in Berkeley (Pete were lucky here in the Bay Area where we have 3 Art Blick stores and a few others that carry a complete selection of papers and supplies.) and bought 2 sheets of 140-lb Fabriano Extra White which I cut down to 11x15 sheets. I haven't tried Fabriano or 140-lb paper yet so I'm looking forward to seeing the results.

As far as digital negatives, well this morning I ordered 2 packs of Pictorico OHP which I hop works out because I have a number of 35mm, 6x45, 6x7 and 4x5 negatives which would make good candidates for an alternative process.

Thomas

[Pete Watkins]

Mr Bryant,
Photography is my hobby and after some years of practicing the art and looking at other peoples work I've come to respect the work and opinions of certain photographers on this forum. Gandolfi has stated that he believes that real photographic negatives produced using a large format camera are superior to digital negatives. I've put up this post seeking help and advice from those who are more experienced than I am at working with the cyanotype process. Lets not turn it into another traditional vs digital post. I have the cameras and I use them!

I tried a few watercolour papers and the highly recommended Platine came out on top by a long way but I can't get it locally so I'm trying other recommended papers that are available locally. IF i'm not satisfied I'll take a cheap train trip to London.

My brushing style....well, although as far as I've read Dr. Mike Ware doesn't see the point in showing the brush marks as part of the image I personally feel that the brush marks on a cyanotype (and other alternative processes) tell the viewer, and prospective buyer, that this image is an individual image and that it would be hard to reproduce exactly. Again, just my personal preference.
Pete.

[D. Bryant]

Great images guys!

I've read that the Kallitype requires a negative with a DR of 1.8 which would print on a zero grade paper. I don't have a densitometer and the image that I last posted
http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showpost.php?p=841636&postcount=1297I rotary developed for 10 minutes instead of the normal 7.75 minutes. However the resulting print lacked sufficient contrast which I corrected for in the above scan by boosting the contrast in PS. So last Sunday before the Super Bowl I drove down and re-shot it increasing the development time to 17 minutes. It's certainly a more contrasty negative and I'm planning to print it tomorrow now that the sun is back. One negative is still undeveloped in the holder pending the outcome.

Also this afternoon I stopped by a Blicks store in Berkeley (Pete were lucky here in the Bay Area where we have 3 Art Blick stores and a few others that carry a complete selection of papers and supplies.) and bought 2 sheets of 140-lb Fabriano Extra White which I cut down to 11x15 sheets. I haven't tried Fabriano or 140-lb paper yet so I'm looking forward to seeing the results.

As far as digital negatives, well this morning I ordered 2 packs of Pictorico OHP which I hop works out because I have a number of 35mm, 6x45, 6x7 and 4x5 negatives which would make good candidates for an alternative process.

Thomas

If you are going to do alternative processes then you need to use a step tablet to determine what the actual DR of the processes are in your darkroom, with your chemicals, and your paper, etc. Don't take someone else's word about what the characteristics of a process are.

FAEW, may not be the best choice for kallitype printing without acidification.

Freestyle's OHP is a drop in replacement for Pictorico OHP and is less expensive, BTW.

[D. Bryant]

Mr Bryant

My father was Mr. Bryant, no need for formalities here!


Gandolfi has stated that he believes that real photographic negatives produced using a large format camera are superior to digital negatives.

Many just as experienced as Gandolfi would disagree.


Lets not turn it into another traditional vs digital post. I have the cameras and I use them!

That wasn't my intent, you made the reference to Gandolfi's opinion, I was just curious about what that might be. Let's just move along then.


I tried a few watercolour papers and the highly recommended Platine came out on top by a long way but I can't get it locally so I'm trying other recommended papers that are available locally. IF i'm not satisfied I'll take a cheap train trip to London.


You will find that many papers are hostile to Cyanotype. Platine is a no brainer. Stock up and it will be something you need not worry about.



My brushing style....well, although as far as I've read Dr. Mike Ware doesn't see the point in showing the brush marks as part of the image

I agree totally with Dr. Ware. Brush marks add nothing to the artistic intent of the printed image. Potential buyers will purchase a print because they like the image, not the brush marks.

They will be interested in the process after the fact. Just because a print is 'Alt' doesn't make it interesting. Showing brush marks are a superfluous affectation intended to elevate a print as high art. Unfortunately people often get hung up on making attractive brush marks.

Don Bryant

[tgtaylor]

If you are going to do alternative processes then you need to use a step tablet to determine what the actual DR of the processes are in your darkroom, with your chemicals, and your paper, etc. Don't take someone else's word about what the characteristics of a process are.

FAEW, may not be the best choice for kallitype printing without acidification.

Freestyle's OHP is a drop in replacement for Pictorico OHP and is less expensive, BTW.

Thanks for the post D. Bryant.

Last week I downloaded Sandy King's unblinkingeye article on gold toning the Vandyke and noticed the recommendation of presoaking in a weak citric or oxalic acid before coating. I'm going to try it both ways and see if the presoak makes a difference. Last week I followed the recommendation of holding the paper over a pot of boiling water for a couple of minutes immediately before coating but didn't see a difference. But I was using Crane's Platinotype which may not require a high RH.

Thanks for the tip on Freestyle.

Thomas

[Vaughn]

I see the difference between camera negatives and digital negatives as being very similar to the differences between showing or not showing brush marks (or the rebate of the film, notches and all). In others words, none, except for the way a particular photographer/artist wishes to work and how he/she wishes their work to look like.

So in that regard I disagree with Ware and Bryant. Brush marks can be superfluous, as can sharpness, clean print edges, step wedges, testing, framing, et al.

[tgtaylor]

I agree with Vaughn on the brush marks. If done well they look good on a print in my eye. But I'm in Pete's position in that my brush marks don't look good so yesterday I bought a roll of Scotch brand Low Tack Artist Tape with the idea of forming a hard border without brush marks.

Thomas

[D. Bryant]

Actually, just putting them in the dark for awhile is suppose to rejuvenate them, too.

I would go with unbuffered rag board.

Vaughn

What Vaughn said. I've seen Anna Atkins cyanotype prints that are over 100 years old that look like they were printed yesterday.

[Vaughn]

What Vaughn said. I've seen Anna Atkins cyanotype prints that are over 100 years old that look like they were printed yesterday.

Was she the person credited with having the first photographs in a book? (photograms of ferns or something like that).

Vaughn

[D. Bryant]

Was she the person credited with having the first photographs in a book? (photograms of ferns or something like that).

Vaughn

Yes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anna_Atkins

[tgtaylor]

Although not a cyanotype, this is my best attempt with this image to date:

Flatiron. Oakland, CA.

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7046/6850173815_0bd70343bb_z.jpg

I developed it this afternoon and decided that it needed a little more time in the sun. Another 1 minute in the sun and a few drops of potassium dichromate in the 2d bath made a marked improvement but, alas, I overdid it in the selenium and it bleached back. I think the pop I'm seeing in the selenium after a few seconds is really from the thiosulfate component and not from the selenium which bleaches the image down. So next time I'm planning on leaving the selenium out and see what happens. No contrast boost in PS was used in the above scan - it made it look worse! Just edge sharpening which didn't seem to have any effect enen though I applied it two or three times.

BTW, I'm now a fan of hard borders over the brush strokes. The 3/4" white border around the image looks nice.

Thomas