Paper Negative Workflows For Various Results

[Fragomeni]

Hi all. I've been interested in paper negatives for some time. I recently acquired a 20x24 view camera so paper negs have jumped to the top of my list. Now there are already a number of threads on the subject on this forum and others so lets try to keep this streamlined and avoid getting off track.

I'm hoping that those who have worked in the medium can chime in and provide some specific information: What workflow(s) have you found to be most successful for a particular concept i.e. sharp negatives and prints, soft focus, grain vs no grain, in-camera paper negatives, paper inter-negatives, digital paper negatives, etc. Please break down the information you provide and be specific about what exactly you do and the results that you've experienced. It will be a good idea to list the specific papers you use, chemistry, times, techniques, waxed vs unwaxed, RC or fiber, retouching, etc.

No comments on the validity of paper negatives please. This is not an argument as to whether or not people should use paper negatives and why.

I don't have my own workflow down yet but to start off I'll share some information that I received from Peter Liepke via email a couple of days ago in regard to his techniques which he uses to produce beautiful soft focus pictorialist images printed typically in Gum Bichromate, Platinum, and Oil. Peter referred me to November/December 2007 issue of View Camera in which he offers a thorough explanation of his paper negative technique. In summary, he uses a system of making paper-internegatives that involves scanning 4x5 negatives into Photoshop where he does minimal modification aside from dust removal and dodging and burning and he does not use any curves as of the View Camera writing. Using Epson brand "Photo Quality Inkjet Paper" and an Epson 4800 he prints the inverted paper negative under the "custom" printer setting and using the Advanced Black and White (ABW) Photo settings (he selects Premium Semi-Gloss Photo setting to trick the printer into allowing him to use the ABW settings). He mentions that he shifts the horizontal and vertical settings to horizontal -50 and vertical +50 which shifts the color of the negative to a greenish hue. Using regular paraffin wax and a hot griddle he applies wax to both sides of the negative and blots off the excess with paper towels until the wax is a thin even coating with little to no streaking. His exposure times range between 2 and 10 minutes under a homemade 500-watt UV fluorescent light unit.

Anyone with experience using Ilford's new direct positive paper please chime in as well with your workflow. Especially with information dealing with contrast as well as how you work your prints i.e. bleaching in place of dodging and burning, etc.

Thanks all in advance for your contributions. I hope this turns into a resourceful thread.

[jnantz]

hi francesco ...

i have been making large format paper negatives for a number of years ... it started
off because i couldn't afford film for some of my cameras, now i would rather expose
paper than film, besides being fun, there are qualities with the paper that i find are
very hard to replicate with film, although i am getting close ...

one of the most important things you can do when you make negatives out of paper
is test your materials. in a controlled environment take a small format, even a
35mm and try to nail down your paper's asa.
papers i use vary from below 1 to 25. i usually use ilford, kodak, and agfa paper.
(kodak is around asa 20 and ilford around asa 6, the agfa is around asa 2 ... )

i try not to expose the paper in really bright/harsh light, but flattish light so
the contrast isn't too off the charts. lenses i use are uncoated and old, so flat light works great.
to process the paper, i typically use ansco 130 bath and a water bath. the pretty dark / exhausted
works great, and a 2nd bath that is fresh.
it takes a while to figure out what a good paper negative looks like. it is nothing like a good film negative.
film you want a nice contrast range, and sometimes some "meat" ...
paper you want it to look kind of thin. you can scan and invert to see what your negatives look like if you want.

to print, sometimes i just send a file to my lab and they print it for me, other times i
just get the receiving paper wet, and the negative wet stick them together, and
expose through the negative onto the paper. it isn't hard. but because of
the paper it can take a long time.

good luck ( and have fun ! )

john

[csant]

If contrast is still a bit too high on the negative, you can consider using a yellow filter. Paper negatives are fun, enjoy

[Jim Noel]

If contrast is still a bit too high on the negative, you can consider using a yellow filter. Paper negatives are fun, enjoy

A yellow filter will only increase the contrast.
I make paper negatives in camera frequently and do not subject them to a computer. It is important to stay away from contrasty scenes as much as possible. Develop in a very soft working developer. Paper developers are by nature much more active than film developers so if they are used they should be highly diluted. I generally use a modified film developer.

The second part of the problem is the print. When paper negatives were the only method available, up until about 1850 but the exact date escapes me, they were printed on salted paper. Salted paper is the longest scaled of all the processes and thus attenuates the contrast of the paper negative.

A few years ago I had the privilege of printing a paper negative from the 1840's. Futile attempts had been made by the printers at the museum to make a silver print. The answer was a salt print using a very light weight paper sized in the same manner as papers of the 1840's. The final print exhibits full detail in the shadows and highlights.

Jim

[Jim Noel]

I forgot to mention that paper negatives of the 19th century were waxed which made them amazingly transparent.
I only do this occasionally when I cannot find the fiber based single weight paper I prefer.

Jim

[Fragomeni]

Interesting responses. I have two workflows I'm working on streamlining: one is for producing in-camera paper negs that don't go to the computer (prefered based on principle) and the other is based on Peter's technique which I discussed in my initial post.

For the in-camera method, which I plan to use with my mammoth 20x24, I'll first experiment with RC negatives. I understand that they're not archival but I'm less concerned about the archival standing power of negs then prints. I've heard good accounts of people making exposures on Ilford RC in-camera the same way that they would film and then developing and waxing in paraffin to achieve a transparent negative which prints easily. Any direct advice on this method?

For the paper-internegatives modeled after Peter Liepke's method, I plan to capture on 35mm and 120 and probably digital as well and then print the negative on my 4800. I'm interested in which paper will work best. I'll try Peter's recommendation but I've worked a little with 68lb artist vellum which seems promising. Its around the thickness of a gloss inkjet photo paper but is already very transparent. I don't know how it takes to waxing yet. If the paraffin effects it like it does inkjet paper then this may produce an exceptionally transparent negative. Only testing will tell. Any further advice on this method?

Also, I have Mark Nelson's PDN and I've been participating in the private Yahoo group for users. Unfortunately, PDN's prospects for silver-gel negatives on InkPress transparency does not look promising. I'm basing this off of the common knowledge that silver digital negs are more difficult to produce then one for alt-processes and based on the accounts of the members of the group. This has led me to translate my energies with PDN over to my other intention with the system which is to produce paper negatives. Can anyone offer any experience and advice for possibly streamlining the processes using PDN. Be as specific as possible please.

[PViapiano]

Well, first, Peter Liepke's negs are digital... not in-camera as I suppose you're looking to create with your 20x24. You should probably use the thinnest base paper you can find, maybe Slavich, and just start experimenting.

Some have used RC paper and peeled the backing off after processing in order to get a more translucent negative, but that could be tricky.

If you have smaller camera, experiment with that first. It'll be a lot less expensive and easier to handle until you get results you're satisfied with.

[csant]

A yellow filter will only increase the contrast.

That is not my experience. Since paper is orthochromatic, doesn't a yellow filter help balancing by stopping part of that light to which the paper is most sensitive…?

[Fragomeni]

Ok, I notice people saying to be careful of high contrast scenes. That makes me think. I do a lot with multiple negatives and masking. I plan to utilize these skills with paper negatives. My question is has anyone had success using multiple negatives of the same subject to get over the contrast obstacle if that makes sense?

Also, i am a zone system user. I am accustomed to knowing the zone range that film is capable of recording and I can go ahead and meter my scene and plug in my factors which allows me to place my shadows where I want them and I can control my highlights in development. How does the Zone System apply to paper negatives? How many zones can be recorded on a piece of paper? I usually stick with zones 3-7 as being the recordable range on film, do I need to change this thinking for paper negatives? Paper develops to completion (usually) so is there a way that I can push or pull my highlights or is it a matter of dodging and burning during printing?

[Fragomeni]

I just ordered Andrew Sanderson's book on paper negatives. Hopefully it offers some useful information. I liked his book on night photography so hopefully this stands up to that one.