MattKing
Moderator
The "silvering out" with old RC prints was/is far more common with images that are in sealed frames behind glass.
I never liked RC. It's just not the same at all.
I'm sure FB is very nice.
You bet it is. RC is nice for the convenience aspect. But once you've printed on FB, I think you'd find it hard to go back. Give it a try sometime when you've got the basics down.
Sounds like a great plan! FB is a bit of a chore with the washing and especially getting (and keeping) the prints flat. Totally worth it IMO, but you can't beat the convenience of RC.One day I'll give it a shot, if only to see what FB devotees are so excited about. For the time being, I am very content to use affordable low-hassle materials that encourage me to go out and shoot, and then go home and print. I am shooting the cheapest films, developing with cheap homemade developers, and printing on cheap paper. When I start to feel like I'm being limited by my materials, that will be a good time to try more premium options.
You bet it is. RC is nice for the convenience aspect. But once you've printed on FB, I think you'd find it hard to go back. Give it a try sometime when you've got the basics down.
I'm sure FB is very nice. To me, as someone who has never used it, it sounds like a huge hassle.
@koraks , @RalphLambrecht : How do you flatten your FB prints?
I've done cyanotype and it's really hard to get the paper to dry flat. I used a pile of books and six clamps (the kind used by woodworkers) to apply pressure for a couple of days and the paper was still wrinkly.
Some people use a t-shirt press (the kind you use to put artistic designs on a t-shirt) to flatten prints. It's supposed to work better than a pile of books because it's heated.
How do you flatten your FB prints?
@koraks , @RalphLambrecht : How do you flatten your FB prints?
I've done cyanotype and it's really hard to get the paper to dry flat. I used a pile of books and six clamps (the kind used by woodworkers) to apply pressure for a couple of days and the paper was still wrinkly.
Some people use a t-shirt press (the kind you use to put artistic designs on a t-shirt) to flatten prints. It's supposed to work better than a pile of books because it's heated.
FB is for people with a Kodak tank and tray siphon.
A pile of books is just fine. I used that for a bunch of 8x10's I did the other day.
I use a dry mount press without turning it on, and I'll put about five prints in from a weekend back to back with paper in between and just leave them pressed for about a week.
There's a sticky thread where people talk about flattening prints.
The "silvering out" with old RC prints was/is far more common with images that are in sealed frames behind glass.
@dcy, from your various recent threads you seem to want to determine every detail of the process before you have taken the photos!
Honestly, FWIW, I would recommend keeping everything basic and simple until you feel a definite need to complicate it. In my own case, at least 35/36 exposures are not worth a second look, and certainly not worth the cost of paper or the effort of toning. (I don't expect anyone to keep the 1/36 after I'm gone, either. There have been threads on that subject here too.)
Making prints at all is quite a hassle compared with making the negative in the first place. With the price of paper these days, it's attractive to make as few prints as possible. But fundamentally, prints are things that can be produced repeatedly, and improved on over time, once you have captured a really good image. And if you have an image so good that you want to make an archival print that will last for decades, you would (surely?) want to make the best possible print in the first place ... which will take several attempts, and probably FB paper too.
In that regard, do you realise that it's perfectly possible to decide to tone prints after they have dried, and after you have decided at leisure which ones are worth the extra effort?
No, that wasn’t the difference.You see, that's where you and I are different people.
No it isn’t. It’s more of a hassle than developing film, largely because of setting up the trays, and washing them afterwards, and the need to commit at least half a day. But if I didn’t enjoy the chemistry, the smell of the paper, and all that kind of thing, I wouldn’t have stuck with film.To you, making prints is a chore.
Now that’s where we differ!Some people hate taking notes. I actually enjoy it
No it isn’t. It’s more of a hassle than developing film, largely because of setting up the trays, and washing them afterwards, and the need to commit at least half a day.
Four or five. My print-washing capacity is limited to 6 12x16in prints, so a 'full' session is generally about that long. It can be a couple of hours longer if I am struggling with a difficult negative, but then I also use all the capacity of the waste bin.When you say half a day... Do you really mean half a day...? How many hours?
For many years, I too used the bathroom as a darkroom. I made blackout blinds by cutting plywood sheet to fit the windows, leaving about 1/8 inch clearance all round, and gluing strips of velvet round the edges. The blinds were then a snug light-tight push-fit, and I had to screw eye hooks on the inside to allow them to be pulled out again. However, they were awkward to store when not in use. If I had to do the same nowadays, I think I would use self-adhesive Velcro on the window frames, stitching the other Velcro part onto blackout material, cut and sewn to fit. Then at least one could fold the blinds to store when not in use.My darkroom is my bathroom and I do not have a realistic way to truly seal it off from light. The only time I can make it dark enough to print is late at night when it's dark outside.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?