i probably won't be of any help here,
but when i solarize in the darkroom
i have a red filter i can put infront of my enlarger
( so i could line it up again with the negative in the
enlarger + the print in an easel.)
i had a system where i would pull the print, wash it a little bit
to remove excess developer, put it back on under the enlarger
and re-expose the paper that way. i used to do this when i had
areas that wouldnt burn very well, and this worked very well ...
(spent/dark ansco130 works wonders for this sort of thing) ...
Ես այլեւս չի պատասխանելու իմ էլեկտրոնային փոստով
եթե դուք պետք է ինձ դիմեք ինձ միջոցով իմ կայքը կամ բլոգում
I've ordered a bottle of Solarol. From reading the first half of the William Jolly article it seems that a Hydroquinine free developer will give better contrast and 'brighter whites'. Anyway, the Solarol hasn't arrived yet, and I'd always wanted to try a coffee developer, so I mixed up some coffee, washing soda and vitamin C powder according to Donald Qualls recipe. I thought that since reports of Cafenol taking about 5 or 6 times longer to develop film I'd have a similar longer developing time with prints and as it didn't have hydroquinine in it might work well for Sabatier. In fact it worked faster than my normal Ilford Multigrade Dev and gave good contrast! because of the short dev time there wasn't any stain to speak of either.
Having established a good (if quick) normal development I then tried some Sabatier. This is where things got wierd. With the standard developer I had to bounce the light of the roof and use a very short burst, with the cafenol the paper became very insensitive to light. At first I put this down to the opacity of the cafenol, but even wiping the print clean before flashing I was still having to use a ten second exposure, directly over the print (about 3-4 times the brightness of previously).
I couldn't get any reversal as such, any part of the paper even slightly exposed under the enlarger stayed normal, but pure white areas darkened, but also took on a noticeable brown stain. Maybe I need to use an even longer second exposure ? The other problem is trying to wipe the print clean before the second exposure without it going streaky. I tried a quick wash in water but that just halted any further development, even when I put the paper back in the cafenol and agitated alot.
Attached is the best print, not up to Bob Carnie's standard I'm afraid (those are great images Bob!) but shows the effect I'm getting. I might try it with an image with more white in, I used the same image as before so I could compare with my previous efforts.
P.S. Photo Engineer, you said you have posted some Sabatier/solarised images, but I can't find them on APUG. Can you point me in the right direction as I fear I might be being a bit fick.
Most modern papers contain developing agents in them. Many mistake the action of caffeinol as the combined action of the incorporated developer and the caffeinol which is very very weak. So, when the developing agent is washed out, the development comes to a halt.
At least, that is one simple possible explanation.
Here's one Crispin. The negative was 35mm Tri-X. Printed and solarized on Bergger CB Art paper using Kodak Selectol Soft developer. It was toned with Kodak Brown toner. My technique followed that outlined in Ed Buffaloe's article.
I haven't done print solarization for a few years now. Lately I've been solarizing on Polaroid Type 55 negatives.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
This is very true, primarily with the variable contrast papers. What you need to do is get some graded chloro-bromide paper such as Bergger CB Art, Ilford Gallerie, or one of the Kentmere graded papers. Then use a non-hydroquinine developer, preferably one that is metol based.
Originally Posted by Photo Engineer
Thanks Ron, for the comment on the photo.
I've had a very bad day, and your picture was one of the bright spots in it!
That is a fantastic picture Alex. Truly inspirational.
I am using multigrade paper so all your comments are making sense.
I'll get some of the paper mentioned to use with the Solarol.
Thanks again for everyone's help.
Once you try the metol only dev you will never go back, keep reading the Jolly manuscript , the two dev technique is what I use.
I really like Ilford warmtone with a grade two filter , it gives me a beautiful split , I am working with sepia for the highlight regions when toning and now using a iron blue for the shadows and mid tones.
Using Alexes beautiful image as a reference .
If you burned in the top section of the print Ie her face and upper torso the density would start going from dark to somewhat normal skin tone, as well in the initial exposure if you dodged the feet slightly the effect of solarization would be more pronounced.
When I am doing solarizations of people for example ,guys with long hair I will do a variation of what I described above.
One of the tricks is to make the viewer think the image is real but then introduce some funky element that confuses the scene.
below is a portrait that was used in a cd cover for some Texas rock band.
As well I have included an image for a show I printed called ACDC . this show is all about cross dressing where the dominant male subjects are in fact women and the female subjects are actually men.
Both these shots are not mine, Brian Helm shot the longhair guy, and Kevin Kelly shot the Cowboy and girlfriend.
solarization in darkroom
The link in this thread referring to William L Jolly's on-line book "Solarization Demystified" produces an error (there is a symbol between "/" and "wljeme" in the address) -- the article can be found here:
Thanks to all for sharing this information, I look forward to experimenting with solarizations.