|
This thread is for talking about wet printing and alternative processes like cyanotype. Post your ~printing station~ and any photo paper you've wasted artistically. Is your printer just too boringly consistent and easy? Do you ever find yourself thinking, "boy, I wish it took 5 minutes to make a single print"? Wet printing may be for you! I haven't done it much, but it's kind of fun in a labor-intensive sort of way. I enjoy watching the photo fade in like some Back to the Future poo poo as I agitate the developer. It's also much less stressful than film dev, since if you gently caress up it's just a single sheet instead of a whole roll and it'll be apparent right away instead of 60 minutes later. Here's my setup:  Omega D2 enlarger on the right loaded with 35mm negatives. From left to right I have trays for developer, stop bath, fixer, and water. (Before starting, I moved the tongs one tray to the left, to avoid contamination) I'm using Arista paper developer and fixer. Since I don't have a proper timer, I have been exposing the paper at f/16 to give me a little more leeway as I count off the seconds. Typically 15-20 seconds seems to do it. Then it's 60 seconds in the developer at constant agitation, 15-20 seconds in the stop, and 3 minutes or so in the fixer with occasional agitation. Then I dump it in the water bath while I start on the next print. The end result, as shot with a potato in a dim bathroom:  Some turned out better than others, the one on the left looks good enough (in proper light) that I printed it a few times, and the one in the center is a favorite from my very first roll of B&W. I have small trays, so I was using a small quantity of developer... about 250mL when mixed with water. It developed the little run of 7 photos last night with no apparent lack of potency; how many prints is a tray of developer usually good for? I just ordered a cyanotype kit, so I'm hoping to try that in the next week or so. Daylight savings switchover should make it easier to print those in the evenings.
|
#
¿
Mar 4, 2015 17:51
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 00:05 |
|
|
BANME.sh posted:I've been wanting to turn my horrible negatives into larger printed versions for a while. I think I have everything I need to do my own B&W prints, except maybe some chemicals and paper. I am a horrible procrastinator so I haven't even bothered trying yet. Here's what I bought to get started: http://www.freestylephoto.biz/16241-Arista-Universal-Liquid-Rapid-Fixer-to-Make-1-Gallon http://www.freestylephoto.biz/11641-Arista-Liquid-Paper-Developer-to-Make-1-Gallon http://www.freestylephoto.biz/194369-Arista-Bamboo-Tongs-Set-of-3 http://www.freestylephoto.biz/12652-Adox-MCP310-VC-RC-5x7-25-sheets-Glossy http://www.freestylephoto.biz/012057-Arista-Set-of-4-Developing-Trays-Accommodates-5x7-inch-prints-(White Fixer, paper dev, tongs, 25 sheets of variable-contrast 5x7 RC paper, and 4 dev trays. Total cost was around $40, and the only other thing I needed was the enlarger (craigslist, $20, plus a negative carrier on ebay for $10) Shellman posted:I miss the darkroom at my school, need to set one up at home in the basement. Any tips on where to get a good deal on an enlarger? (I'm guessing Craigslist) If you are in the SF Bay Area, I have a spare Omega D2, you can have it for free. This offer also applies to any other goons in the area. I will not ship it because that would be a bitch. It needs a light bulb and a negative carrier, and you'll need to glue the bellows back on to the upper portion.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 4, 2015 18:50
|
|
|
BANME.sh posted:I went through 3 or 4 different enlargers over the course of a year before I found one that didn't have any missing attachments. I got them all for free. Right now I have a Durst 609 which I like because it's small and I don't have much space for anything larger. I have everything else, I think. Trays, tongs, timer, safelight, even a dryer. Timer, safelight, dryer?  Aren't you a fancy ladMy timer: "one-onethousand, two-onethousand..." My safelight: A red compact fluorescent bulb in a cheap lamp My dryer: a string in the shower Everything still comes out mostly ok, so you have no excuse not to use your fancy poo poo  Sounds like you're all ready to buy some chemicals and give it a shot. You should be able to get away with about $15 worth of dev and fixer. Oh yeah one last thing that's pretty important, you'll need an easel to hold your paper while exposing it. I went with an old Airequipt 4-way easel from Ebay for $16, it's pretty solid metal construction and has worked nicely.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 4, 2015 19:07
|
|
|
I just realized two Ansel Adams-related things: 1. The local library has 19 of his books including The Print, The Negative, and The Camera, so I'll be stopping after work in the hopes of upping my print game. 2. The title of this thread was definitely inspired by forums poster ansel autisms' custom title, "dodge this burn". Despite not intending that, I regret nothing. Edit: vvvv I haven't watched The Matrix since like 2003 and I don't think I ever even watched the sequels so nope Pham Nuwen fucked around with this message at 23:37 on Mar 4, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Mar 4, 2015 23:32
|
|
|
eggsovereasy posted:Is that the natural tone of argyrotypes or did you tone it with something? These all look really good, I especially like the 30 minutes green tea. What paper did you use? My cyanotype kit should get here tonight... they say you shouldn't leave the mixed chemicals sitting around unused, but once you've applied it to the paper is it ok to store? I was thinking I could mix some up, paint a bunch of sheets of paper, and then keep them wrapped in black plastic in the closet as I work my way through them.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2015 00:06
|
|
|
Wow, thanks Photographer's Formulary for including 1g of the very nasty potassium dichromate in your cyanotype kit, in a leaky little baggy no less! I eventually got it cleaned up and washed the whole thing down the sink, gently caress the added contrast I'm not messing with that carcinogenic poo poo.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2015 03:30
|
|
|
Well my first (rushed) attempt at cyanotype was a laughable fuckup. On Sunday, I had mixed up 10mL of emulsion and brushed it onto the thickest paper I had, which was just some sketching paper. I printed out a negative with my b&w laser printer. I only had color transparencies but it seemed ok so I said screw it. This morning I stuck it in a picture frame and left it on the porch for an hour. Washing revealed a very blue picture... you could make out the details, but it was all in shades of dark blue. I'd post pictures, but I dropped the paper while trying to hang it up and it tore, being lovely wet paper. Luckily I've got enough formula left to do that 499 more times, so I've not really lost anything except some time. I'm planning to stop at Wal-Mart or the art store tonight and pick up some watercolor paper, I figure that might help keep the paper from getting too soft/wrinkly when wet. I'm wondering about exposure... was mine so dark this morning because I left it out too long? It was kind of hazy out there, so I figured it needed longer. Has anyone tried using a blacklight to expose cyanotype?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 10, 2015 17:50
|
|
|
voodoorootbeer posted:So many variables can affect exposure times. I've been recording exposure times and EV for ballpark figures then I plan to go back and look up the UV index charts for my exposure dates and times when I want more precision. My home laser (HP4000 series something or other) made such a thin neg that the exposure times I've been getting with my work printed negs were far too long. I've been using heavy sketching paper without any problems. Save your fuckups for experiments with toning and bleaching: That print of yours is more or less exactly how mine looked, so I'm guessing I seriously overexposed. The paper tore badly, so I threw it out, but it's good to know it may be possible to fix my fuckups by bleaching and toning. I may need to start sneaking my negative printing at work, because my home printer seems to create some pretty blatant lines along the negative. Maybe I just need to clean the rollers or something.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 10, 2015 21:09
|
|
|
I seem to remember someone in the Dorkroom printing directly onto walls, brushing the emulsion on top of the white paint. Ring any bells?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2015 23:33
|
|
|
McMadCow posted:I'd like to hear more about this, because I'm absolutely stumped as to how someone would be able to adequately fix and wash emulsion on a standing wall. I would too, but I can't remember anything more than "I think I saw someone doing prints on the wall". I'll try searching for it. Edit: I've been playing with cyanotype lately so I'm trying to imagine how cyanotype might work on the wall. You brush it on, then leave the room in darkness while it dries. Then expose... you'll have an interesting time getting the image on there, maybe you could take a regular enlarger, lay it on its side and let the sun project the negative? Washing would also be hard unless you're in a warehouse/someplace with concrete floors and drains. Pham Nuwen fucked around with this message at 00:43 on Mar 18, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Mar 18, 2015 00:34
|
|
|
krnhotwings posted:Unrelated, I seem to have "misplaced" my pack of 8x10 and 11x14 paper when I moved apartments. Money down the drain. I should really get some 8x10, I've been messing around with 5x7 paper because it's cheap but I think I have one or two negatives that are almost good enough to make a bigger print. I should also get FB this time but I think Hitler made some good points and RC is awfully easy to use.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2015 16:12
|
|
Well, they were RC paper, so I guess this is a good time as any to switch to FB and give that a shot.
|
Primo Itch posted:I want to start this off with a gently caress you, thread I want to start off with a gently caress you, those look amazing compared to the contrast-less poo poo I've been getting. What sort of printer did you use to make the negatives? I think my b&w laser might not be cutting it, but I loving hate inkjets so much... Did you do test strips? How long did you end up exposing those?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 6, 2015 17:51
|
|
|
McMadCow posted:
It's good More details?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 30, 2015 22:41
|
|
|
McMadCow posted:Just aimed my camera phone at the grain focuser. I love the three-dimensionality of negatives and that hand was particularly expressive. Now just put your phone on one of those things that makes a contact print of your screen...
|
|
#
¿
Jul 30, 2015 22:48
|
|
|
Made some plain old-fashioned cyanotype prints today and I'm quite pleased with how they came out. First I printed out 3 transparencies but forgot that they need to be inverted, so I printed out and trimmed another set. Here's the two best so far:  It's funny, my phone's camera removes a lot of the blueness (I think it has to do with the color of the bathroom light) so they look like they've been toned... they're quite blue in person.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 6, 2015 23:50
|
|
|
For the hell of it, I spread some cyanotype formula on a white t-shirt and gave it a shot: Came out pretty OK, but I didn't realize until afterward that I'd placed the negative on the shirt at an angle. Oh well, I'll still probably wear it.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 7, 2015 22:29
|
|
|
voodoorootbeer posted:How do you feel about the general durability of the emulsion on a stretchy fabric? No loving clue, this was just something to do with my excess formula. I'm going to wear it, wash it, and pray it doesn't dye all my other clothes blue in the wash.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 8, 2015 02:15
|
|
|
BANME.sh posted:In an effort to keep this thread from falling into archives... That print looks great, I've been meaning to try printing from color negs especially now that I have some good ones from my Japan trip. What kind of exposure times did you use?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 23, 2015 23:37
|
|
|
BANME.sh posted:Thanks! OK, I was wondering if by long exposure you meant 30 sec or 5 minutes... I'll do some experiments, it'll be kinda different anyway because I'll be doing 35mm, but at least I know the ballpark.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 23, 2015 23:46
|
|
|
BANME.sh posted:Thanks! It's weird, my prints from color negatives needed less time than the b&w. B&W neg, f/8 for 15 seconds:  Color neg, f/8 for 5 and 7 seconds, respectively:  
|
|
#
¿
Oct 25, 2015 01:17
|
|
|
My 8x10 paper got here today, so I tried some prints. First one of my favorite B&W shots: Then, after a few attempts I got one of my favorite color shots printed (even with test strips it ended up taking 3 prints to get something I really liked)  The others aren't terrible, I'll probably take one in to hang up at work. The "winning" combination turned out to be 35s at f/5.6 with the 3.5 filter, followed by 2 seconds or so (timer isn't super precise) of f/11 with no filter.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 29, 2015 05:51
|
|
|
nielsm posted:Finally, would it still be possible to find kits to upgrade it to handle 6x6 or 6x7 negatives or will I be stuck using it for only 35mm? I don't know your enlarger, but AFAIK for most you only need a suitable negative carrier and a longer focal length lens to enlarge MF.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 1, 2015 14:57
|
|
|
Pham Nuwen posted:For the hell of it, I spread some cyanotype formula on a white t-shirt and gave it a shot: Keeping the thread out of archives by saying this shirt is still going strong, in fact it looks better now after a few washes to sort of mellow the blue. I may try the process again if I can figure out a better way to stretch the shirt. I also think I'd want to do something about the edges of the negative... either brush the formula into an area smaller than the negative, or do some sort of gradient at the edges so it transitions more gracefully, because I do think the ragged brush edges look kind of neat.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 15, 2016 16:43
|
|
|
What paper do you guys like to use for cyanotypes? I've had pretty reasonable results with pads of watercolor paper from the craft store, but I'd be interested in what your preferences are.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 10, 2016 21:05
|
|
|
Despite being the creator of the thread about alternative processes, I've never been thrilled with how my cyanotypes come out. Not enough detail, in a lot of cases. To prevent this thread hitting the archives, anyone want to share their cyanotype workflow?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 4, 2017 19:47
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 00:05 |
|
|
Primo Itch posted:Amazing as always mate! That looks great, post more please!
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2017 21:16
|
|
