just make sure you keep all the "[" and "]" intact...
Originally Posted by dwross
-- Ole Tjugen, Luddite Elitist
It must be something in the air Denise, I get the Formulary baryta and coat on it 'as cut' and it does not cause me any problems. Alex reviewed paper coated that way with no serious problems.
I will agree though that the chance of defects goes up whe using baryta paper due to the blade sticking to the baryta as it swells and making movement of even the smooth blade difficult.
As for papers, I've found that for strength to survive both the coating and processing steps, you would need a hot press paper of 90# or higher. With cold press papers you would have to start at about 120# or 150#. I've used a textured paper of 300# that makes excellent prints for postcard use.
The swelling and sticking is the grain issue. Fortunately, contact printing flattens out any bumps. Blade-coating baryta with the grain (so that the paper cups up in one straight curl top to bottom rather than washboarding) is the easiest and most successful paper I've found. I don't care much for the look of baryta, a fact I've regretted more than once given its ease of use. Try coating the other direction and see what you think (I cut an 11x14 sheet in half across the width for the 4x5 blade).
Something just occurred to me. There is no reason to assume that the Formulary is consistent on their paper cutting. If they are trying to minimize wasted paper, especially for special orders, the grain could vary from sheet to sheet. I'll ask them tomorrow and report back to you.
Last edited by dwross; 05-13-2007 at 11:29 AM. Click to view previous post history.
I managed to coat 4 sheets this morning before I ran out of emulsion.
Originally Posted by dwross
These are coated with my basic blade, charged with approximately 8ml of emulsion, onto cheap watercolour paper.
The paper was soaked in lukewarm water for about a minute, and then squeegeed onto a plastic support plate, as per Denise's method.
After coating, I allowed the emulsion to gel for a few seconds, and peeled the paper from the coating support. The paper was then placed onto a large sheet of perspex to dry.
The drying stage was very dodgy, in that I have no way of leaving the darkroom (the loft) without flooding the place with light.
I had to dry the prints with a hairdryer in order to box them up so I could leave the darkroom.
I'll post a proper scan of the latest prints when they are dry.
For now, though, I've attached a couple of photos of the results. the red and green rings indicate and identify defects in the coating as follows: red=handling defects (clumsy damage ), green=coating defects.
I think the handling defects could be avoided by setting up a proper drying system, and also adding a hardener to the emulsion before coating.
These are the best coatings I've made so far. Unfortunately I underexposed the panoramic one quite badly.
Typically, I also printed it on the edge of the coating as well, so there's a triangular chunk of image missing.
I'm going to try and reprint it on one of the other sheets I coated.
Lessons from today:
1: Find out how much emulsion you have left before beginning a coating session
2: I need a better drying system. IE. One that is lightproof. I need to be able to leave the darkroom before the coatings are dry.
3: Coating is not that difficult, even with primative gear.
4: Wetting the paper prior to coating helps the process a great deal. Squeegeeing it onto a plastic support helps even more
5: I need more than 8ml in the blade
6: I really do need to level the bench up.
7: I think I need to add hardener to the emulsion before coating.
In conclusion then, Most of my problems would evaporate with slightly improved equipment, and small adjustments to chemistry and technique.
Last edited by ben-s; 05-13-2007 at 08:22 PM. Click to view previous post history.
Lens caps and cable releases can become invisible at will. :D
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
Best wishes in your efforts.
To all who coat on wet paper, be careful. I have had it stick to the drying surface, and have found that it may be better to air dry hanging after a short time gelling on the flat surface.
That's true. After trimming the sheets to 8x10, I could see no indication of which direction the coating blade was moved, nor can I discern any paper grain effects. I'm talking about the baryta base.
Originally Posted by Photo Engineer
Visually comparing the hand coated baryta prints to prints on manufactured paper, I cannot see any significant difference in the surface textures. The hand coated stuff looks like any other glossy fiber base paper.
Yahoo! Sounds like it's coming along. Thanks for the report. As more of us start doing this, the knowledge base should start building up.
To make a light trap out of a not-so-dark room (the times I've worked in 'spare' bathrooms, I've gotten as primitive as hanging a towel rod over the top of the door to drape a blanket. That allows a quick enough escape for anything but film.
re: baryta paper (at least the variety sold by PF). The baryta coating covers one surface of the paper. The barytes (barium sulfate) is added to the gelatin to make the paper smoother, to increase the whiteness of the base color, and to increase the coverage of the emulsion. I don't know what the backing paper is, but it looks like a thin bristol board type. The grain isn't visible. It certainly isn't a screen-dried watercolor paper where the back side is easily identifiable by the visible screen marks. After a successful blade coating, there is no indication of which direction the blade was pulled over the paper. During blade coating, the odds of success are greatly improved by watching the grain. And with PP coating, watching the grain is vital (at least in my experience).
If you happen to have a couple of pieces of uncoated baryta laying around and are willing to sacrifice them to science, try this:
Tear one so that you get two pieces with the long dimension of the original piece going the long dimension and the other one so that the short dimension of the original becomes the long dimension. Set them on a dry, smooth surface and spritz with water (I used the spray bottle I have for ironing). Stand back and watch the show. The paper will cup up in a smooth line on one and washboard on the other.
As I said yesterday, it occurs to me that the paper may not be consistent from pack to pack. I had an unopened pack here that I just opened and ran the test on. The results were the same as my previous observations, but that's still not enough evidence to say for sure and all time.
Which brings me to a micro-gripe: There is too much 'conventional wisdom' forming and setting rock-hard based on far too little (primarily) anecdotal information. If one person with some credentials and virtual gravitas makes a pronouncement, it is expected that is the end of that. A "Trail Closed" sign is set at the beginning of the path.
People sharing their experiences and observations is a mixed blessing. I'm certainly happy to let someone else make a few of the expensive mistakes. I love learning from other folks. An the other hand - and this is a biggy - if those experiences, trials, and observations are technically flawed or simply colored by a hidden paradigm that you may not support (bigger is better, glossy is better, glossy is tacky, if it was good enough for Kodak, it's good enough for me, etc, etc, etc,) and you don't take the risk of walking around that "Trail Closed" sign, you stand the chance of missing out on a lot of fun and satisfaction.