Printing a cyanotype with a paper negative. Advice, please.
I have recently made my first attempt at producing a printable paper negative using an 8X10 camera and one of Rienhold's miniscus lenses. The learning curve wasn't too bad to get what appears to be a printable paper negative. I used Arista paper. My interest was in approximating (as opposed to replicating) how Fox Talbot might have produced a print, so I contact printed it using the my UV box which has 12 Black light tubes. I works great with negatives and canotype with a typical exposure of 2 to 2 1/2 minutes. With the paper negative my best exposure, which wasn't great, was at 59 minutes. Any suggestions on printing cyanotypes with paper negatives? Oh, I also exposed one with with 300 units of light on a NuArc 26K-1 plate burner, which essentially produced no results. Bill Barber
How about waxing the negative? That would be consistent with early paper negatives.
Rae has done this with her WPPD Quinninup group - In daylight her exposure was 5 hours which gives a fairly soft image - Waxing the paper is correct, but if you are using RC paper that will not work as the wax will not form a "light pipe" in the interstices in the paper
My suggestion, and Rae has not tried this, is to make your own paper negs on a strong thin paper that will support liquid emulsion, when the neg' is dry wax that and see how you go
(Has anyone tried an inter-egg pinhole as at http://www.lomography.com/magazine/l...pinhole-camera that I saw on APUG yesterday?)
I'm assuming waxing the back side rather than the emulsion side and using a wax made for photographs? BB
it seems we are getting the same transmissions from the mothership
i have been playing with paper negatives and ( hand coated ) lumen prints and my exposures are hugely long in direct bright sunlight ...
soon i will be making in camera paper negatives with hand coated paper negatives on
cold pressed/smooth thin sketch paper and exposing on cyanotype paper. like talbot's paper negative, the writing paper
is thin enough to allow light to pass through. regular photo paper seems too dense/thick.
it seems like a lot of work, but it is pretty easy once you get the coating down, and fresh ( sort of ) emulsion.
i am sure with cyanotype chemistry, writing paper or thin(ish) cold pressed paper will work with your lighting system,
or at least bright direct sun with a long exposure.
have fun !
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
I don't know if my PM reply got through, so here it is again with apologies for a kind of repetitin on John's comments above
"Yes, you wax the back so that the paper becomes more transparent - The way an oil stain on a bit of paper is brighter - I don't think workers using salted paper had the luxury of special wax, so I would suggest a clean white wax carried in by some solvent that will not lift the emulsion
However, these things can only be tested by you in your situation - I would like to hear your results, as Rae is wanting to stretch her PH photography - See http://www.jbaphoto.com.au/raestarr.html - Using me carrying my 10x8 camera and me still being her darkroom boy!
Have fun, that is the main thing with projects like this, yes it is research in the true meaning of the word, but can still be fun
At risk of sounding facetious, I'd thought of using vegetable/olive oil to make a print transluscent for papaer neg work. I've not yet tried it, but it's been in my mind.
Anyone else had a similar thought or experience?
Why not try sourcing drafting vellum to see if it can be coated. It was expressly made to be quite translucent, to allow the prompt exposure when making blueprints.
I am pretty sure that modern blue prints are not far off cyanotype, although the last ammonia based amchine in our office yielded a direct possitive image.
I was cyanotype printing last night.
I was read a reference in Keepers of the Light while waiting on the print in the uv box, and channel surfing on the tv. Isn't cyanotype printing great that way?
Crawford mentions that Herschel found coating solely with ferric ammonium citrate and exposing and then adding the ferricyanide after exposure yielded a positive.
I have yet to try that one for myself.
It does sound intriguing.
If succesful for me it could lead to one off cyanotypes in the spirit of what a degaurrotype delivers, direct from the camera.
my real name, imagine that.
I tried this a couple of times several years ago. It may work for some, but I found it to be quite a hassle handling oily papers whilst trying to keep the rest of my setup free from oils, dust, fingerprints, etc. Then you are left with an essentially uncleanable paper negative that must somehow be stored or discarded. I also tried peeling the emulsion layers off the paper to allow more light to pass through the negative, but that was no picnic either. Since then I have simply learned to work with the longer exposures that paper negatives require. This works fine in the darkroom, where the light source is consistent, but might pose problems for cyanotypes exposed by the sun.
Originally Posted by Niall Bell
Tom, on Point Pelee, Canada
Ansel Adams had the Zone System... I'm working on the points
system. First I points it here, and then I points it there...
The thought of a greasy and difficult to handle oily print contaminating everything in sight and picking up dust etc was why I'd never actually done it. Thanks for this steer away from it!!