David A. Goldfarb
Moderator
This rings true with my experience.
Advantages and history AZO / silver chloride paper?
-
A
- Thread starter B&Wpositive
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
For Sale FS: Sinar Pan-Tilt Head
- Started by B.S.Kumar
-
For Sale Lenses and helicoids for Bronica S2 and related series
- Started by hsandler
-
For Sale PENTAX SPOTMATIC SPII
- Started by Peter Schrager
Forum statistics
This rings true with my experience.
Compare curve 4 with curve 5 in my post above.
PE
PE
The bromide affects image tone/colour, the higher the balance of chloride to bromide the greater the effect, but the colour shift can be controlled by additions to the emulsion like benzotriazoles.
Both Kodak & Ilford used to recommend less Bromide in MQ formula for contact papers, but of course later Kodak may have adjusted Azo for use with Dektol etc.
Ian
The bromide affects image tone/colour, the higher the balance of chloride to bromide the greater the effect, but the colour shift can be controlled by additions to the emulsion like benzotriazoles.
Both Kodak & Ilford used to recommend less Bromide in MQ formula for contact papers, but of course later Kodak may have adjusted Azo for use with Dektol etc.
My point is that colder colours/tones which many users of contact papers want are best achieved with MQ developers with a low level of Bromide.
Ian
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2003
- Messages
- 624
To add to what PE said about the end result there is no substitute for being a master of your materials whatever your choice may be.
For me personally the choice of being a silver chloride consumer is equal parts of the visual improvement in the image quality that contact printing inherently represents and the marvelous tonalities that can be attained with Azo/Lodima and Amidol. I have seen what can be attained and it is very stimulating. That said the difference between acceptable, excellent and WOW is as wide as the Grand Canyon.
These days I have come to the conclusion that my days at looking at graphs are just about over. IMHO success in the game of making fine prints has two critical tenets. First is you have to have the correct reference as to what constitutes a fine print. Secondly you need to be disciplined enough in your work to isolate the many variables and learn from the process of filling up the garbage can with your experience. It is not easy nor quick and when you factor a full time "day" job as opposed to photography full time it takes longer, but so what? If it were easy or quick everyone would be doing it.
For me personally the choice of being a silver chloride consumer is equal parts of the visual improvement in the image quality that contact printing inherently represents and the marvelous tonalities that can be attained with Azo/Lodima and Amidol. I have seen what can be attained and it is very stimulating. That said the difference between acceptable, excellent and WOW is as wide as the Grand Canyon.
These days I have come to the conclusion that my days at looking at graphs are just about over. IMHO success in the game of making fine prints has two critical tenets. First is you have to have the correct reference as to what constitutes a fine print. Secondly you need to be disciplined enough in your work to isolate the many variables and learn from the process of filling up the garbage can with your experience. It is not easy nor quick and when you factor a full time "day" job as opposed to photography full time it takes longer, but so what? If it were easy or quick everyone would be doing it.
Wow, what a thread! Lots of expert advice from Michael Smith, Ron Mowrey, and others...
Thanks everyone, and keep the knowledge flowing.
Thanks everyone, and keep the knowledge flowing.
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2002
- Messages
- 660
Just home. More later. I discovered this thread when a friend notified me of its existence and sent me a link. (I was not browsing APUG.) But I looked for the thread under contact printing and it is not there. If I want to go to it directly, which category is it under. Could someone send me an email letting me know. Thanks.
Michael A. Smith
Michael A. Smith
You come back to where you posted your last post, or:
APUG > APUG English Forums > Darkroom > B&W: Film, Paper, Chemistry > Advantages and history AZO / silver chloride paper?
APUG > APUG English Forums > Darkroom > B&W: Film, Paper, Chemistry > Advantages and history AZO / silver chloride paper?
Is it possible to use AZO for enlarging if you use enough exposure?
Also, is it physically possible to dodge/burn while contact printing? I don't see how you could.
Also, is it physically possible to dodge/burn while contact printing? I don't see how you could.
I would guess AZO is about 50 times slower than regular enlarging paper. So, you can enlarge on it, but takes a long time.
You can dodge and burn when contact printing by blocking the light source just above the glass, but need to keep the card/disc close to the glass. Sometimes you can see the details enough to position, especially with a bright light, but sometimes with a dense negative you have to estimate where to dodge/burn.
Jon
You can dodge and burn when contact printing by blocking the light source just above the glass, but need to keep the card/disc close to the glass. Sometimes you can see the details enough to position, especially with a bright light, but sometimes with a dense negative you have to estimate where to dodge/burn.
Jon
I know someone that had an azo enlarging head - it had a strong UV light source in it. Search around the interweb and I'm sure you'll find some references.
Azo paper is about 5 stops slower than a typical modern enlarging paper when used with a typical enlarging lamp. Use of a UV lamp, as Kirk says, improves the situation quite a bit.
Dodging and Burning is possible but is a lot more difficult as Jon points out.
PE
Dodging and Burning is possible but is a lot more difficult as Jon points out.
PE
And you can get a sunburn from the UV if you like to burn in your prints!
David A. Goldfarb
Moderator
Lodima seems about a stop and a half faster than Azo, so I did some testing and was getting enlarging times in the 4-6 minute range for 8x10" prints from 4x5" negs using an Aristo Hi-D cold light head.
Yes, you can dodge and burn between the light source and the neg.
For contact printing on Azo, I use a simple Ikea halogen desk lamp with the UV filter removed.
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2002
- Messages
- 660
To B&Wpositive: Some, perhaps most, of your questions have already been answered, but I am now home and have the time to respond at length. If I duplicate some answers already given, I apologize for taking up anyone's time.
"How does it differ from your average silver gelatin paper? What are its advantages?"
Azo is (or was) a silver chloride paper. It is a slow paper, made for contact printing, although enlargements can be made on it. The advantages, as I see it, is that prints on Azo, when done well, have a depth to them that is almost impossible to get with enlarging paper. There appear to simply be more gray tones in the curve. And, to my eye, the black appears blacker, richer. more luminous.
"Why is it so legendary and what's the history behind it."
Azo (but let's for a minute forget Azo and talk about silver chloride papers in general) (enlarging papers are chloro-bromide or bromide) was not legendary until I wrote about it 13 years ago. Most photographers were unaware of its existence until that writing. After that, many started to use it. It became popular, and if you will, legendary. The finest silver prints I have ever seen, by Edward Weston, Brett Weston, Ansel Adams, and Frederick Sommer, were all made on silver chloride paper, often on Azo.
Azo was first introduced by Photo Materials Company in Rochester in 1898. In July of that year Kodak bought out Photo Materials, and produced Azo until 2004 or 2005. Azo is probably the longest continuously manufactured photographic paper ever made.
What does "AZO" stand for or mean?
I recall hearing two stories about that, but at the moment I can only recall one of them. It was said that one could make a fine print on Azo because it could handle all types of negatives from A to Z.
Which came first in the history of the photographic process -- AZO or "standard" silver gelatin paper? Was AZO the standard by which all others were compared, much like Tri-X for black and white film or Kodachrome for color film?
All silver chloride papers came before enlarging papers. Contact printing came before enlarging; there were no enlargers. No, it was never looked at as a standard. Enlarging papers are so very different.
Now that someone is making an AZO-type silver chloride paper again, I'm also curious how common it is to find people using it. I hear that it's the ultimate black and white silver paper and has a better tonal depth than standard silver paper.
We have just pre-sold our new silver chloride paper to close to 200 photographers. So at least some people are using it. And we anticipate that once folks see the results. many more will want the paper.
As far as I am concerned, yes, to quote you, it's the ultimate black and white silver paper and has a better tonal depth than standard silver paper.
Can the average non-photographer tell the difference between an AZO print and a print made on standard silver paper?
I will here quote Alfred Steiglitz:
If you place the imperfect next to the perfect, people will see the difference between the one and the other. But if you offer the imperfect alone, people are only too apt to be satisfied by it.
So I would say, that if you put an Azo print next to the same photograph printed on enlarging paper, that yes, you would see the difference, immediately.
Now, partly this depends on who is making the print. Last night Paula Chamlee (my wife and a fine photographer in her own right) and I gave a talk in Connecticut. At the end of the talk I showed a few of my recent photographs that were printed on Azo and Lodima paper. One person looking, whom we happen to know and who makes excellent prints himself, said to me, How do you get that color in your prints. I cannot get it. So, there are Azo prints and there are Azo prints, just like anything else.
Paula and I, when we have the time, probably around the first of the year, will announce that we will be selling example prints at a price significantly less than the prices our prints regularly sell for, so that people can see the quality of which silver chloride paper is capable.
As I write this, I have an idea: for a fee, which would not be high, but would be nonetheless substantial, say, a couple of hundred dollars, I will print anyones negative who wants it printed on silver chloride paper. I would ask them to send, along with the negative, the print they made on enlarging paper. I would not be interested in printing close-to-impossible negatives
the point would not be to show that this paper can print anything, but would be to show the difference between, hopefully, a photograph well-printed on enlarging paper, and one printed on silver chloride paper.
Am I right that a well-printed AZO can command a higher price in the art market than a standard silver gelatin print?
No, you are not right. Buyers do not care what paper a print is printed on. All we, as makers, care about, is making the best prints we can. For me, that means using silver chloride paper. Were it to disappear, I might switch to making sculpture, as not to be able, because of the materials, to make prints that really sing the way silver chloride prints can sing, as opposed to speak, would be most unsatisfying.
Good luck to you and thanks for your thoughtful questions.
Michael A. Smith
"How does it differ from your average silver gelatin paper? What are its advantages?"
Azo is (or was) a silver chloride paper. It is a slow paper, made for contact printing, although enlargements can be made on it. The advantages, as I see it, is that prints on Azo, when done well, have a depth to them that is almost impossible to get with enlarging paper. There appear to simply be more gray tones in the curve. And, to my eye, the black appears blacker, richer. more luminous.
"Why is it so legendary and what's the history behind it."
Azo (but let's for a minute forget Azo and talk about silver chloride papers in general) (enlarging papers are chloro-bromide or bromide) was not legendary until I wrote about it 13 years ago. Most photographers were unaware of its existence until that writing. After that, many started to use it. It became popular, and if you will, legendary. The finest silver prints I have ever seen, by Edward Weston, Brett Weston, Ansel Adams, and Frederick Sommer, were all made on silver chloride paper, often on Azo.
Azo was first introduced by Photo Materials Company in Rochester in 1898. In July of that year Kodak bought out Photo Materials, and produced Azo until 2004 or 2005. Azo is probably the longest continuously manufactured photographic paper ever made.
What does "AZO" stand for or mean?
I recall hearing two stories about that, but at the moment I can only recall one of them. It was said that one could make a fine print on Azo because it could handle all types of negatives from A to Z.
Which came first in the history of the photographic process -- AZO or "standard" silver gelatin paper? Was AZO the standard by which all others were compared, much like Tri-X for black and white film or Kodachrome for color film?
All silver chloride papers came before enlarging papers. Contact printing came before enlarging; there were no enlargers. No, it was never looked at as a standard. Enlarging papers are so very different.
Now that someone is making an AZO-type silver chloride paper again, I'm also curious how common it is to find people using it. I hear that it's the ultimate black and white silver paper and has a better tonal depth than standard silver paper.
We have just pre-sold our new silver chloride paper to close to 200 photographers. So at least some people are using it. And we anticipate that once folks see the results. many more will want the paper.
As far as I am concerned, yes, to quote you, it's the ultimate black and white silver paper and has a better tonal depth than standard silver paper.
Can the average non-photographer tell the difference between an AZO print and a print made on standard silver paper?
I will here quote Alfred Steiglitz:
If you place the imperfect next to the perfect, people will see the difference between the one and the other. But if you offer the imperfect alone, people are only too apt to be satisfied by it.
So I would say, that if you put an Azo print next to the same photograph printed on enlarging paper, that yes, you would see the difference, immediately.
Now, partly this depends on who is making the print. Last night Paula Chamlee (my wife and a fine photographer in her own right) and I gave a talk in Connecticut. At the end of the talk I showed a few of my recent photographs that were printed on Azo and Lodima paper. One person looking, whom we happen to know and who makes excellent prints himself, said to me, How do you get that color in your prints. I cannot get it. So, there are Azo prints and there are Azo prints, just like anything else.
Paula and I, when we have the time, probably around the first of the year, will announce that we will be selling example prints at a price significantly less than the prices our prints regularly sell for, so that people can see the quality of which silver chloride paper is capable.
As I write this, I have an idea: for a fee, which would not be high, but would be nonetheless substantial, say, a couple of hundred dollars, I will print anyones negative who wants it printed on silver chloride paper. I would ask them to send, along with the negative, the print they made on enlarging paper. I would not be interested in printing close-to-impossible negatives
the point would not be to show that this paper can print anything, but would be to show the difference between, hopefully, a photograph well-printed on enlarging paper, and one printed on silver chloride paper.
Am I right that a well-printed AZO can command a higher price in the art market than a standard silver gelatin print?
No, you are not right. Buyers do not care what paper a print is printed on. All we, as makers, care about, is making the best prints we can. For me, that means using silver chloride paper. Were it to disappear, I might switch to making sculpture, as not to be able, because of the materials, to make prints that really sing the way silver chloride prints can sing, as opposed to speak, would be most unsatisfying.
Good luck to you and thanks for your thoughtful questions.
Michael A. Smith
Don't forget, you can make your own Azo-type paper. The Photographers Formulary has a new product called "Formazo". For under $40 plus a paper base of your choice, you can make it yourself. http://www.photoformulary.com/DesktopModules/StoreProductDetails.aspx?productID=1250&tabid=9&tabindex=2&categoryid=101&selection=0&langId=0
I've seen prints that were handmade with an emulsion similar to Formazo, and they were quite nice, and they had that special touch of being completely handmade.
I've seen prints that were handmade with an emulsion similar to Formazo, and they were quite nice, and they had that special touch of being completely handmade.
Michael,
I know your comments were directed at a specific person, but they are as always envigorating, even if we disagree on some points
I think it is wonderful that you have been able to do what you have done for the lowly silver chloride paper.
Your comments are stimulating.
I need to point out however, that while contact printing preceeded enlarging as we now know it, Silver chloride gelatin emulsions came after silver chlorobromide and silver bromide gelatin emulsions.
As I understand it, there were silver bromide (contact) printing papers for before enlarging became popular.
Please note that the manufacturers, while perhaps not being intentionally dishonest,
do not tell us the whole truth when they describe their papers as being "chloride" or "bromide"; it is a fact of the industry that other halides are permissible without changing the nature of the product, much less without putting a disclaimer on it.
That is, there are other factors more important than the mere presence or absence of a single halide.
Anyway, Best Wishes to you Michael!
Ray Rogers
As far as Contact Speed Emulsions go...
Case in point:
I tested Rockland's Liquid Light brand of emulsion many years ago.
It was a high chloride, silver chlorobromide contact printing speed emulsion.
(ISO-P: 10 ; for comparison, a 100% AgCl emulsion I made was ISO-P: 2.5
In other words, the truely "pure chloride" emulsion was two stops slower)
Liquid Light had a very strong D-max.
I have no current information on their product, but if it is still around, you might also give this product a try. There is also Saul Bolaños and his LUCENTA Silver Emulsion as well, if you want to shop around.
Without a doubt... the quality you get will pretty much reflect what you put into it.
Don't spend your money all in one place now!
Ray
Case in point:
I tested Rockland's Liquid Light brand of emulsion many years ago.
It was a high chloride, silver chlorobromide contact printing speed emulsion.
(ISO-P: 10 ; for comparison, a 100% AgCl emulsion I made was ISO-P: 2.5
In other words, the truely "pure chloride" emulsion was two stops slower)
Liquid Light had a very strong D-max.
I have no current information on their product, but if it is still around, you might also give this product a try. There is also Saul Bolaños and his LUCENTA Silver Emulsion as well, if you want to shop around.
Without a doubt... the quality you get will pretty much reflect what you put into it.
Don't spend your money all in one place now!
Ray
Last edited by a moderator:
Azo's main claim to fame was a 100 year history on continuous manufacture. I'm not sure if it was first developed by Kodak or by one of the many firms Kodak acquired in its early history. I know the manufacturing process changed from time to time during that period, but I understand the emulsion changed very little. It was a very slow, cold toned contact paper. For many years before the end of its manufacturing life it was the only contact printing paper available. The emulsion was also used on several other specialty papers made by Kodak, like Resisto, an early resin coated paper for aerial film printing. The paper was considerably more amenable to developer manipulation than current papers. The term "azo" usually refers to a class of nitrogen compounds these days, but that has nothing to do with Azo paper. I have no idea where the name for the paper came from.
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2002
- Messages
- 660
Coating one's own paper, whether with liquid light or Ron Mowrey's formula, or with any other formula, may indeed yield excellent results. However, it is certainly a lot more time consuming that using ready-made paper. It is fine for those who make only a few negatives, but if one is making hundreds of negatives a year, or a month, then it is hardly practical.
Edward Weston wrote about "mass-production seeing." To me and Paula, the "seeing" on the ground glass is the high-point in the photographic process.
Making prints is not a mechanical follow through, but is also a creative act. We feel it is most important to follow through on one's seeing and to deal with every negative. We either print every negative or throw it out. We have no unprinted negatives, or only very current ones. That way, we learn from what we have done and therefore do not repeat ourselves. Working in this way would be impossible were we to coat our own paper.
Azo was not a cold-toned paper, regardless of how Kodak listed it. Velox was a cold-toned paper. Azo could be cooler or warmer depending on the developer used. Veloz was always quite cool with any developer.
Michael A. Smtih
Edward Weston wrote about "mass-production seeing." To me and Paula, the "seeing" on the ground glass is the high-point in the photographic process.
Making prints is not a mechanical follow through, but is also a creative act. We feel it is most important to follow through on one's seeing and to deal with every negative. We either print every negative or throw it out. We have no unprinted negatives, or only very current ones. That way, we learn from what we have done and therefore do not repeat ourselves. Working in this way would be impossible were we to coat our own paper.
Azo was not a cold-toned paper, regardless of how Kodak listed it. Velox was a cold-toned paper. Azo could be cooler or warmer depending on the developer used. Veloz was always quite cool with any developer.
Michael A. Smtih
I guess the choice to coating your own paper really depends on whether one wishes to create a truely hand-made print, from start to finish.
I can understand using commercially available products. I use them myself due to the ease of use.
I can understand using commercially available products. I use them myself due to the ease of use.
A truly hand made work of art would included a hand coated plate and a hand coated paper for both the negative and the print. The user could then select the surface for the paper and the weight. Otherwise, you are locked into the film and paper types that are made commercially.
PE
PE
I don't know... I'd have a hard time telling a painter who didn't prepare their own canvas that their work really isn't handmade. A fine photographer should have no less interaction with their materials than someone wielding a brush. I believe, at this level, it's more a matter of semantics than a discussion of art.
| Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:  |