Advantages and history AZO / silver chloride paper?

[Photo Engineer]

There are levels of hand made Shawn. Fully hand made migh include a hand made camera and lens. The degree to which a picture has been hand made does not affect it as art, merely as to hand madeness (if there is such a word).

You can have art produced from commercial products and that is the gist of what Michael Smith says, or you can have art using different levels of hand made material, which is what Kirk and I posted.

PE

 

[Shawn Dougherty]

The degree to which a picture has been hand made does not affect it as art, merely as to hand madeness (if there is such a word).

PE

Exactly, semantics. =)

 

[Ray Rogers]

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 agree with just about everything you've said here, Michael.

One does need to take seriously the question of how best to spend one's time,
and while some may down play the amount of time involved in hand coating,
when you get right down to it, the image itself should remain the center of attention,
not who manufactured the paper it was placed on.

Velox was specifically formulated to be cold toned.

I have seen an unacceptably small number of both AZO & Velox,
but I really can't see much difference between the sample prints of each
that were prepared by Kodak...

Perhaps this as you said, is related to the developer Kodak chose to use.

Ray Rogers

 

[JBrunner]

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.

Indeed, process has nothing to do with art, however art is affected by process. How that process informs is part of the artist's repertoire. One isn't better than the other. A Lodima print and a print made with a hand coated AZO like emulsion will be different. Both have the possibility to be art, or less than art, depending upon the vision and ability of the artist. The point is what the artist envisions and how he uses things to accomplish that. In the end, the print speaks, or it doesn't. If the paper was hand made by the slavish labor of the indigenous peoples of wherever, and the emulsion contained the sweat of everyone in group f/64 it won't elevate bad work. A good process in skilled hands can however elevate the already lofty, so process, or rather the application of process matters a great deal, but largely to the artist alone, assuming they are sufficiently nuanced to deal with the advantages and disadvantages inherent in any choice, and those choices should be made according to vision, and not affectation nor convenience.

 

[Shawn Dougherty]

I was simply taking exception to the "hand madeness" issue.

I think we've all come to terms with our own definition of art, the work that goes into it and the fact that our individual efforts are appreciated mostly - if not solely - by ourselves.

 

[Ray Rogers]

Indeed... A good process in skilled hands can however elevate the already lofty, so process, or rather the application of process matters a great deal, but largely to the artist alone, assuming they are sufficiently nuanced to deal with the advantages and disadvantages inherent in any choice.

The icing on a cake, the perfume on a lady...

The effect depends on the nature of each and their interplay...

There is a saying about putting pearls on a pig not being able to raise the gracefulness of the swine.

 

[doughowk]

Hand-made has to do with the level of involvement of the artist with the final product. If you point a camera and push a button, and the rest is handled by Polaroid or some digital camera/printer combination; then you have contributed very little to the end product. You as an artist can only take credit for selecting the subject matter for the image. If on the other hand your involvement is total, then your artistic choices and craftsmanship are the final product. Many points in between the two extremes. Cartier-Bresson was a great photographer, but he also worked with some great printers who also deserve credit for the final print. Just as the manufacturer of a product you chose to use in your workflow should deserve some credit for your final product. And back to Lodima, it is a great paper that won't get in your way in creating works of art; but it still requires your craftsmanship and artistic choices to achieve a beautiful print.

 

[Kirk Keyes]

and the emulsion contained the sweat of everyone in group f/64 it won't elevate bad work.

Prove that!

I think if my paper was made for the sweat of Weston, Cunningham, and Adams, it would have a uniqueness beyond anything that would be optained otherwise...

Besides, "bad work" is just a matter of taste, I think.

 

[Kirk Keyes]

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.

Making your own plates and paper is just like turning your amp up to 11, when everyone else has an amp that only goes to 10...

Afterall, it's one louder.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Yeah, but you might be playing really bad music or Howard Stern at a higher level. Who wants that.

It has to be quality emulsons and coatings if they are hand made, and the person taking and printing the picture has to be an artist. Any old trash will just not do.

I think that by observation, most hand made items are of higher quality than mass produced items in some indefinable way. Mass produced may be defect free, but not necessarily of high quality. Some modern films and papers give lifeless results even though the quality of the coated product is high when looked at from the POV of defects.

PE

 

[Michael A. Smith]

I don't think it matters what paper a photograph is printed on, as long as it is a great print. And what is a great print: one that not only fulfills the photographer's intention, but one that does so in the deepest possible way.

In my experience, limited though it may be, if one is talking about silver prints, I find that some silver chloride prints and some silver chloride papers, fulfill the artists' intention in t he deepest possible way. Yes, that is subjective.

Now, I have seen a great print from someone who hand-coated a sheet of paper using Ron Mowrey's formula. The problem is that it took him about 5 to 10 failed sheets of paper to get it--corners of the emulsion lifted off, that kind of thing.

I subscribe to something Edward Weston once wrote: that he was interested in "mass-production seeing." To me, the "seeing" is the essence of what photography is all about. The problem with hand-coating is that the amount of time spent on the process interferes with time that could be spent "seeing." But hey, everyone has their own concerns and some are content to make very few photographs and to spend what I think is inordinate amount of time doing so. Nothing wrong with that, if that is the process that gives them the most pleasure.

Why do we make photographs? I can only answer for myself, really: It is the "pleasure in the process." If there were no longer pleasure in the process, I would stop tomorrow. But "pleasure, by the way, I mean something very deep and enriching, something that enhances our connection to the world in a very deep way.

Michael A. Smith

 

[dwross]

Hi Michael,

I love Lodima. I love the product and the labor of love and brains it took get the paper to market. It is a huge contribution to photography. And, let's face it: simply opening a box of gorgeous paper and pulling out a sheet when you need one is better than sliced bread. I tend to see the photographic 'process' as involving more than that most of the time but you'll never hear me say I'm not grateful for factories.

I will have to correct one misconception. I no longer have any failures with handcoating silver gelatin printing paper, and I can produce it faster than I can find images worth printing. Making a batch of emulsion takes no more time or thought than making a batch of homemade bread.

Most people will continue to want to open boxes of ready-to-wear paper, but for those of us who love getting into a process and/or who might want gorgeous emulsion on other than a smooth, glossy surface, custom handmade silver gelatin emulsions can no longer be discounted.

Denise

 

[Photo Engineer]

I have to second what Denise says! And the proof is posted on her web site or here on APUG for all to see.

PE

 

[J. Miller Adam]

Weston & "mass-production seeing"

The irony, of course, is that Weston was always far from mass production for most of his career, expect perhaps the print project he & Brett completed near the end of his life.

His original prints are famous for having an inner life and glow unlike any other others of his generation, and the printing instructions he wrote on the glassine envelopes for each of negs often filled the full 8x10 page, or more. If any of you ever have the opportunity to see original Weston prints, they're worth the special trip.

I suspect when he talked about being interested in mass-production seeing, it was mostly wishful thinking on his part.

Miller Adam

 

[Michael A. Smith]

"Mass-production seeing" did not mean "mass-production printing." Weston stated explicitly that his time spent photographing during the "Guggenheim years" demonstrated "mass-production seeing. During that time (about 18 months of photographing), he made over 1,500 negatives--and printed almost all of them! For someone using an 8x10 and not making portraits in a studio, where constant photographing could be occurring, 1,500 negatives in 18 months is surely "mass-production seeing." And then with the Leaves of Grass trip that was repeated (as long as the trip lasted).

Michael A. Smith

 

[Monday317]

I think some of the best photographic advice I've ever received was to STANDARDIZE. One film, one film developer, one paper, one paper developer. Only after you have become very well versed on how those products perform should you consider deviating.

+1!
Best advice I was ever given, re: light writing. Was also told, "One lens", which-even in the 1970s--wa considered utter nonsense by the 1-1000mm zoom lens fanatics. Did my best 35mm work with a 105mm f2.5 AIS Nikkor. Did mediocre work with the multi-lens MF & LF I tried thereafter. Got a nice Zeiss Ercona, fitted with a BTA f3.5 105mm Tessar and am very excited by the tests I've been running.

Thank you for making this point, John! :joyful:

 

[Gerald C Koch]

The name AZO has no significance with respect to photographic papers. It is a made up name like Velox and all the others.

 

[Gerald C Koch]

When I was nine my parents gave me a Kodak A B C Photo-Lab kit. It contained everything needed to develop film and prints. It also included a very nice contact printer and 3X4 Azo or Velox paper. One of the features of these papers is that they produce neutral blacks. To this day that is what I strive for, a neutral black. Of all my prints only one is toned due to the subject.

 

[Monday317]

I think we're splitting hairs a little here...

Everyone has made valid points on this thread--which I stumbled across wondering about Azo paper myself...

Anyway, I was taught the practical definition of Art was a creative effort to communicate or evoke an emotion by the deliberate manipulation of the chosen medium. Thus, a stage cast, poet, singer, or even photographer could be considerd artists. (Unfortunately, one miust consider the stretch of including goofs who throw paint into a jet engine exhaust, or rap singers the apellation "Artist", but it's a necessary evil, like say allowing lawyers to run for Congress. But I digress...) The point being, it's really not the materials or tools, but the finished work we should consider. For instance, I doubt very much Leonardo daVinci raised his own bagers, cotton and flax seed in order for him to make his own brushes, canvas and oil paint. I'm certain he obtained the very best materials he could find that suited his purpose. (Yes, history buffs, most of the classic painters made their own paint, but you get the drift.) In fact, a realatively famous painter in prefacing a "How To..." book mentioned a fellow student who never skrimped on any of his materials saying, "You never know when comes the masterpiece." Great thought, especially for the GAS-afflicted, needing extra rationalization for their expenditures. Like me.

Now I have personally seen some Ansel Adams prints at the George Eastman House in Ro-cha-cha (home slang for Rochester, as in NY) and I can attest to a few things.

1. His prints generally looked like I myself was producing as to print color; thank you Rapid Seleniumj Toner!
2. His prints (on Zone VI Brilliant as I was also using back in the day) weren't noticably sharper, but were better at 16 x 20 than my 8 x 10, due to an 8 x 10 neg vs. my 6 x 7. The raw image quality was better as a result, but if I had stuck my tripod into his tripod holes, I felt my printing was on a par, technically. I had a very difficult 6 x 4.5 of my father in those days, and like Adam's Moonrise, it was the dickens to print. But I made several decent prints for family and Dad approved of them very much.
3. If you compared an Adams print to an Edward Weston or a Edward Steichen print (or many others) you came away with many impressions of technique, print quality, etc. I doubt any writer here would percieve these works in the same way PE, or Monday317 would--nor should they. we would be lousy artists, if we did!

These workers were great because they lead the way for the rest of us mucks. Whether you shoot 35mm Holga or a 22 x 17 Ebony, print on some cheap Pacific-rim RC-VC stuff, or hand-laid platinum paper will really not decide the artistic merit of your finished work. Only the concensus of your audience--probably long after you're gone--will decide that value, AKA The Test of Time.

Bottom line: enjoy what you do and try not be too much of a process freak or gearhead doing it! Them's this ol' buttershug's 2¢ USD, thank you very much!

 

[Photo Engineer]

I've been in the archives with Joe many times looking at Adams prints and those of the other greats. I was most affected by prints by the masters that were "off the beating path for THEM". And thus an Adams print of RR tracks, switches and a signal struck me as I could not identify it with Adams but it was very good. Another was a Weegee that was 'normal' and did not fit with his outre method. But it too was very good. Both of these untypical photos were good prints and fell into the class of "great" photos we were being shown.

PE

 

[Monday317]

...and I hope I didn't sound dismissive of these great photographers. Just pleasantly surprised that, on the surface, some of their technical results were not beyond what I found I could do. I'm certain Ansel Adams himself wanted his admirers to have at least accomplished that novice level--and more.

 

[Gerald C Koch]

Well, as Mozart comments in the film Amadeus, "the rest is just scribbling." In other words his compositions already exist completely finished in his mind. Putting them down on paper was trivial. The hard part was already done. Ansel Adams technique or that of Edward Weston and all the other greats is basically the same. There is nothing particularly difficult in creating an excellent print. But as Adams also says, he would rather see a poor print of a great subject than a great print of a poor subject. It is what they each see in their mind before pressing the shutter that makes them great. It is their vision that sets them apart from the rest of us.

 

[C Henry]

For me, the difference between enlarging papers and Lodima is all about gray. Black and White can be achieved with any paper, but as a contact print, the range of tones achieved with Lodima is stunning...

 

[DREW WILEY]

Put a Stradivarius violin in the hands of Bozo the Clown and it still sounds like Bozo the Clown. Not everyone can print, no matter what you
give them.

 

[Gerald C Koch]

Put a Stradivarius violin in the hands of Bozo the Clown and it still sounds like Bozo the Clown. Not everyone can print, no matter what you
give them.

Playing a musical instrument requires certain physical and mental skills. So an imperfect analogy. However not all the great photographers did their own darkroom work. Many relied on professional print services from Magnum. Henri Cartier-Bresson and Lisette Model immediately come to mind. So darkroom work is a teachable skill and does not required any inborn ability. So a great photographer need not be a great darkroom technician. What separates great photographers from the rest of humanity is their vision. As I said before the ability to see a great photo before pressing the shutter.