Can I second Rik in thanking everyone for their help.
I'd seen that Unblinking Eye article a little while ago but Google couldn't find it again for me, it would appear there is some disagreement on the spelling of Sabattier :)
Rik, good luck with your experiments.
Just FYI, modern films are built to reduce solarization due to addenda present in the emulsion which control reciprocity, but nothing can control Sabattier. And there are several spellings of this. I use both myself sometimes forgetting which is which or not caring.
A friend of mine did it fairly successfully and repeatably by using very exhausted Dektol. The brown chewy kind that is bullet proof. He would put his print in the bottom of this muck and develop very slowly and then turn a weak light above the tray. Sometimes he'd hit it with a strobe.
How did you get on with your Sabattier prints ?
I struck lucky almost straight away (the first two attempts were of the coal in a dark cellar school) once I got the illumination level of the flashing lamp tamed by bouncing it off the ceiling.
I've attached a couple of the results, with the original straight print for reference. It's very grainy and covered in scratches because it's from the first ever roll of 8x11(mm) minox film I used. Interestingly the second attachment with the more subtle, less reversed, effect has magically removed alot of the grain and damage marks, although admittedly the midtone detail has also been lost.
I used normal Ilford multigrade RC paper exposed at grade 4 and normal Ilford universal multigrade developer at the box dilution. I used a 60w 'pearl' bulb desk lamp for the second print, the first more contrasty one used one of the blue 'daylight' bulbs. As usual scanning and low resolutions jpeg files have lost a lot of the magic from the real print - it has an almost metallic look to it.
The longer you let normal development go ahead before the Sabattier exposure, the more contrast in the positive image, and the more impact you get from the negative image. You also get better line effects.
On a 2' development time, I typically develop for 1'30" or more before re-exposing.
See the color examples I have posted. I have done both negative and positive color sabattier.
Here are three print solarizations that I am currently working on.
Ilford Warmtone grade 2, Mr Jollys formulas for duo tone, second dev loaded with potassium bromide for wild colours when toning.
I have found that the time to pull the print from the first dev and put into the second dev then flash is approx 1/2 the total dev time, I use 2 min twenty seconds.The print I find would be just emerging blacks at this halfway point.
The more exposure on the print will produce more real *no effect* the more dodging you do will also allow you to get more effect and the mackie line. I like playing with these balances to produce a real and unreal print.
The dodging tool is very effective weapon as well as heavy burn.
I like very strong negatives ie contrast, for lith printing and solarization as well.
If you do a lot of lith printing it will help in solarization as your skills at pulling a print in the developer is very helpful in solarization as the fun is when and when not to put the paper in the stop bath.
The effects are endless, I have found that all papers work with this process some better than others. I use the two Ilford fibre papers as in solarization if I want real silver looking prints I will use MG4.
Contrary to the idea of using grade 4 papers for solarization I have found that grade two works well for my needs and tastes.
The possibilities are endless but I would be using a metol based developer only for the most control.
the William Jolly articles are absolutely the best descriptive articles I have found on this subject.
I have seen formulas that also use catechol and catechol with Metol.
Originally Posted by crispinuk
unlike Crispin i havent been so succesful yet. I have tried the same with my regular paper and developer but i think the light i use for flash is too strong. I only have limited place so its about 2 feet above my tray. I'm using a 25 watt bulb, but will get something less. I have hooked the bulb up to my timer, but the shortest i can get there is 1 second. The best (or not soo bad) result came after developping for 1,5 minutes, flash for 1 second and then taking the print out almost immediately. If i leave it in longer it goes almost black.
i'll try again and let you know
Use a 7.5 watt bulb.