Platinum Prints

[Mark_3632]

Ahh-ha! Michael, using three or four negatives to process one print could be the answer to why you like these so much. (by the way are the books self published? My writing degree built in me a curiosity of the path something takes to end it's journey between hard covers).

Burkholder describes a multi negative process in his book. He states that you can get so much more out of the print because you control the dark's and highs all on their own so you can manipulate them seperately without touching the other or the mids. A process I will try some day when I have the time and money for the equipment. This multineg process might even take an AZO print to higher levels.

A true black makes for a crisp look, like the sharp crease in a pair of trousers. It makes perfect sense that this multineg process could achieve this look. With a multineg process you of course get into the realms of the digital neg and computer altering of the original image to isolate the highs, lows, and mids. I guess in theory if you did not want to store your images in a format that will quickly become drink coasters or wheels on a school project, you could get those files put onto photo negs elsewhere and then print them at your leisure. Because they are photo negs you would just store them with your others negs.

Does anyone know if there is a way accomplish this multineg process without a computer?

[Francis Abad]

If the result of all of the above is to have at some time in the future high-quality PtPd pre-coated paper commercially available (once again) then three cheers for those who pursue their ideals and likewise to those that take the opposite view in order to effect even greater drive to achieve those ideals. I am excited to see PtPd in the market very soon (please do champion this cause if you can Michael).

[John O'Connell]

One of the nice things about Pt/Pd prints is that they are Pictorialist in nature, with relatively weak blacks, low contrast, etc. Some of us even like these things. Azo still exists if we wish to explore a very different look. I happen to like Stieglitz's solarized Pd prints, horror of horrors, and part of my intent in getting into the handcoated processes was to explore that look for myself.

You can certainly explore multiple-negative printing with traditional materials if you have the time and the cash. You'll need pin registration equipment, good lab discipline, and a willingness to waste a lot of film testing but the results would be largely the same.

Burkholder's technique places registration marks on the computer-produced negative, but you still have to punch it and use pins. The advantage of the computer technique is that you get to test by printing and then reprint a new negative quickly.

[Bruce Watson]

Michael, I'm not mystified at all. You are the one who said "Why this comment elicited hostility is a mystery to me."

You asked. Some of us tried to answer.

To paraphrase an old quote for which I've fogotten the correct attribution, "you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink."

[Geoffrey Swenson]

“Perhaps this attitude is the reason why most LF photography, in my opinion, is so incredibly dull and without any emotional or intellectual content. ”

Here we go again on content…Well said!!

“Now, did you really want to discuss this, or did you really start this thread so that you could make yet another reference to your books on Italy? ”

Yupp! I just didn’t want to be the one saying it.

[Mark_3632]

>>You'll need pin registration equipment

Yep, no problem

>>good lab discipline

In all BW photography isn't this the case?

>>a willingness to waste a lot of film testing

Uh...isn't that how us photographers learn new things anyway. We shoot film I am not sure I would call it a waste.

>>but the results would be largely the same.

Do you mean the same as the digital negs?

[e]

Perhaps we get a little too involved in the process... to the detriment of the inner reason the photograph should exist. Ex.,you can dress up a moron in sharp clothes and he will still be a moron. Better looking but still a moron... Conversely you can dress up a saint in rags and well....In music, it's the same thing...there are the technicians aplenty that pride and measure themselves by their technical superiority, they tend to be very boring after awhile... kind of like watching someone lifting weights. Then you have the ones with heart and soul...these are always interesting... esp. if they have developed the chops and technique to express themselves clearly. Personally I always enjoy the photograph with heart, life and soul anyday over the perfect empty one. I guess it is just what your definition of "good" really is.

[Michael J. Kravit]

Isn't this silly.

I have seen pt/pd prints that have excellent contrast and excellent dmax. I have also seen Azo prints that are both good and bad. As a collector, I own a large number of platinum/palladium prints that are extraordinary made by artists who are revered for their printing and creativity.

Beyond that, I find this whole discussion not to be about Azo vs. Pt/pd, but Michael A. Smith vs. others. To be honest, I sense arrogance in Mr. Smith's posts as well as those that respond to him. There are those that find Mr. Smiths images less than stellar and those that love them.

Let's live and let live, but I think that the arrogant attitude on both sides needs to subside before truly productive discussions can be had.

Mike

[Michael A.Smith]

This from up above by J Ryder:

"But please explain more about what your goals are for the platinum prints. Do you imagine they will be more beautiful, or perhaps bring out other subtleties in the negative? Or will you be trying to duplicate in platinum what you have already expressed in silver? Did you select negatives that are difficult to print in silver? Do you imagine side by side comparisons in your gallery? If so please share the marketing and opinion results with us. As an extremely dedicated and proven fine art printer, someone to whom the print matters, are you apprehensive about giving up control of the image? Are you confident the makers will be able to achieve the results you specify or will you be leaving some final judgements up to them? The images in your book can only be viewed as reproductions of works of art, on the other hand the platinum prints will be the works of art themselves. For that reason I would think you will approach these two processes very differently. Will you be signing the platinums? I am sorry but I probably have a million more questions. To me this is an exciting opportunity for our community to explore these issues with you, I sincerely hope you feel like sharing."

Sorry not to answer sooner. Good questions, all of them.

Why do it? To see if I can learn something. I will be surprised if they are "more beautiful" than the prints I already make, but it is entirely possible and I expect that they will be for some tastes. Basically, my goal is to duplicate the tonalities of the silver print, although I know the prints will look quite different from each other. I will select a range of negatives, both easy and hard to print, but in all cases those I feel might be appropriate in platinum.

Marketing them. I'm sure I will want to sell them if they are any good, but I believe buyers I currently know will buy only my silver prints. I haven't really thought how I will market the prints--that is a long way away; it is way too soon to think of it now. Showing them side by side? I'll certainly look at them side by side, but have not thought of showing them that way. Probably, I'll have them make at least one or two carbon prints as well--then it will be indeed be interesting to look at them all side by side.

I am not afraid of giving up control of the printing process. These folks know what they are doing and, in this arena, I would not. I am confident they will do a good job. They know well my taste in prints. If I like the prints they produce, I will sign them.

These folks in Belgium have an atelier where they print for other artists--in a variety of media--gravure, platinum, combination silk screen and offset (a proprietary process), other processes at the moment I cannot recall, and carbon, carbro, and dye transfer will come next year. It is located in a small village on the grounds of an old castle and the people who work here are true masters of their craft. I'm really a little bit in awe of it all.

[Ken Lee]

Any update on the availability of the aforementioned paper ?

Any suggestions on how to get max DMax ? I have been using Stonehenge paper, with Pt/Pd in various ratios, and the images look wonderful wet :-) Once they dry, however, they lose their snap. Of course, I know they will never have the snap that we can get with other methods, and I have adjusted my film development accordingly. But I am wondering if there is a way to give them just enough so that my wife doesn't mention that they look (as Michael and Paula have described) "muddy" or "dreamy".

I recall that Paul Strand used to varnish his images, much to the consternation of people involved with print convervation and longevity. I presume that he admired the depth and warmth of varnish, as well as a little boost in the snap department. If varnish has been good enough for painters over the centuries, why not put some on a Pt/Pd print ? Or is there something better ?

On a related note, once the image is behind glass, how much does any of this matter ? In other words, doesn't the placing of an image behind glass contribute to the DMax, as much as say a glossy paper stock verus matte ?

Many thanks for any insights.