Just wanted to update you on the status of the B&S carbon tissue. I have been beta testing this tissue for over a year, quite intensely during the past several weeks. I can tell you that Dick Sullivan has invested a lot of time in learning to produce a good product and from my latest testing he looks to be there. I have prepared a review of the B&S tissue, which, barring unexpected circumstances, will appear in a recent number of View Camera.
I don't know exactly when Dick will begin selling this tissue but I suspect based on the status of the material as of this point that it will be in the first quarter of next year. The tissue itself will be available in several colors, including a color Dick calls Nut Brown that I am especially fond of. For a couple of years I had been trying to make a tissue appropriate for my rock art negatives from Utah and this color, which closely approximates the color of many of the sandstone formations of that area, seems about perfect to me. And I think it would be very nice for other subjects as well.
Along with the tissue B&S will be selling Melinex, a plastic material with an emulsion surface that takes the carbon image beautifully, and perhaps some gelatin coated papers as well. BTW, carbon prints on Melinex are considered to be the ultimate in stability. As I recall Wilhelm rates the archival quality of some of the Ataraxia carbon prints on Melinex in the hundreds of years.
All in all the prospect of once again having a high quality carbon tissue available commercially is an exciting prospect and I hope that some of you alternative types will take advantage of the opportunity to give carbon printing a try. The cost does not look to be prohibitive. Dick estimates that the cost will be about 1/3 that of pt/pd (based on use of his kit), but my own prediction is that it will be more like 1/2 or 2/3 of the price. But considering the end product, still not a bad price.
Thanks for the information. Carbon is my favorite process, had to give it up a few years ago, when I moved my darkroom and stability became a problem. Would love to dive back in and develop a consistant system. maybe this will help. Please keep us advised.
Sounds like this could be a good way to get into this process. Good to know...
Jorge If you like Plat/plad your going top love carbon/carbro but don't be mislead it may be cheaper but, it's far more tempermental! But theirs nothing like it, when you look at a print from an angle the black and darker values actually are raised from the surface.
Well my first experience with carbon was a disaster. Seems I hydrolised the gelatin (heated it too much) and the stuff was so thin it would run everywhere.
I have seen Carbon prints and they are beautiful, I guess having a commercial tissue will go a long way to make this porcess more popular.
I have seen Carbon prints and they are beautiful,
I am working up to alt.processes but have had some setbacks that have hindered me. I loved Gryspeerdt's bromoils and his video of the process touched on carbon/carbro. What little I have seen appealed to me though and I would like to learn more.
For a primer on Carbon Process:
I presume the carbon tissue is, like Azo, not suitable for enlarger printing, only contact printing.
How does final result compare to digital carbon prints? See following:
Boy, what a great link. I had no idea that so-called 'digital carbon' was being marketed so aggressively (and deceptively). Just because something has carbon black in the inks does not mean that it is the same as what is traditionally known as a carbon print. Sadly, I think the onslaught of this sort of marketing will totally devalue the term 'carbon print' until no one knows what it signifies. I think it is very interesting that people will use just about any nomenclature to avoid using the term 'ink jet print', which is really what they all are. Giclee, digital platinum, digital carbon, etc are all somewhat deceptive monikers meant to portray a commonplace, easy-to-mass-produce object in a different, supposedly more flattering, way.
Let's face it, if these prints were actually harder to produce than a REAL carbon print, the creator would name them something entirely distinct in order to differentiate the print from a 'common' carbon print. As it is, they are misappropriating the cachet and uniqueness associated with a truly craft-and-skill-heavy process in order to sell something that is common as dirt. Unfortunately, the skilled traditional practitioners are vastly outnumbered by unethical hoardes who don't give a rat's ass about honesty in representation, and I fear the battle has already been lost.
I am not dissing the prints - I actually own a few inkjet prints that I consider fine pieces of work - but I still think there is nothing wrong with calling them what they are: inkjet prints.
Isn't Clyde Butcher the Florida photographer that nearly lost his shirt because he used RC paper instead of fiber paper? He sold the state of Florida a bunch of print that were super big like 8x10 feet then the paper started to self destruct and he had to replace them at his costs.
I wonder if those like Clyde even no if there really is an older process called Carbon Printing. I would have never known about it if not for Sandy and those that do that process. A lot of people know color and silver and platinum but some of the more obscure processes might have slipped by a few folks.
That link of Clyde in front of his computer is kinda funny. If you look carefully, you'll see he's got that pesky whif of a cloud highlighted -- click, phttttt, presto! Gone! Nature, finally as a computer literate god would have intended! ...and another garish, overly dramatic landscape gets added to the pile.