Negative density for Alternative printing.

[Tri Tran]

Here's the shot of the 20x24 in negative which I processed for the Platinum print. Just so to give you an idea how to expect the density when it comes to the alternative contact printing. Hope it helps.

[Michael Clark]

The negative looks great, the snow at the bottom of neg looks pretty dense, but it printed fine on the print. Tri can you show a larger view of print ?

thanks Mike

[Tri Tran]

Don't be fooled by the dense neg, otherwise it will take forever to print . Dense neg is often give you the flat print. What you need to look for is the contrast and the separation of the shadow , mid tone and the highlight.

[Jim Noel]

Tri is correct. Overall density is not desirable. The density range from shadow to highlight is the important factor. Rather than dense, thin shadows are desirable so as to reduce printing time.

[stawastawa]

interesting, looking forward to see some more responses to this thread =)
~nicholas

[Jim Fitzgerald]

Even range of tones is a great thing. As a carbon printer I find negatives with a net density over 2.00 are wonderful to work with. Again it is how it is in the overall negative that counts for my carbon work. If I mess up I know how to adjust my process to print the negative. Exposing and developing your negative for the printing process you will use is key in any printing process I feel but very important in alternative printing. I will try to find and example.

[Tri Tran]

The rule of thumb is DO NOT overexposed your negative. Here's a another example of Carbon neg density for portrait work.

[Vaughn]

When I make a in-camera film negative with too much contrast for platinum printing (I use no contrast agents when pt printing), I know I have a great negative for carbon printing.

One 'mistake' people make when learning alt processes is trying to bend a process to fit negatives they already have...instead of tailoring their negatives to the alt process. That 4x5 negative that made a beautiful silver gelatin on Grade two or three paper (or #3 VC filter) will be stretching the pt process to its max to produce an acceptable pt or pd image. And when things are stretched to the max, the image quality can (but not always, of course) start to break down.

One of my most successful carbon prints had highlights that appeared to be blocked up -- but with a very bright light behind the neg, detail could be barely seen (sunlight on white granite). The darkest shadow areas were clear...have no idea what the DR of that neg was -- I do not think one could read thru the highlights with a spectrograph. The neg took a 6 hour exposure under a 175W mercury vapor lamp. I damaged the negative doing a 10 hour exposure, so the image is 1 of 1. I made the 10 hour exposure because I thought the 6 hr one was slightly light -- but dry-down made the 6-hr image perfect.

[andreios]

Tri is correct. Overall density is not desirable. The density range from shadow to highlight is the important factor. Rather than dense, thin shadows are desirable so as to reduce printing time.

Have to agree with this. Some of my recent negatives from old churches are quite "thin" when looking at them but the contrast or whatever it is called is right and they print beautifully as kallitypes.

[Vaughn]

There are always exceptions. I am amazed that this salt print worked as well as it did. I would consider the neg perfect for a silver gelatin contact print of 'normal' contrast.