Biodegradable photographic film?

[Wallendo]

I am curious as to the intent of putting "art in nature". Without knowing the artist's intent, it is hard to envision an appropriate response to the original question.

And although this is an analog thread, it would seem that using digital printing technology would greatly increase the number of paper options, especially for art designed to rot away anyway.

 

[Luckless]

I am curious as to the intent of putting "art in nature". Without knowing the artist's intent, it is hard to envision an appropriate response to the original question.

And although this is an analog thread, it would seem that using digital printing technology would greatly increase the number of paper options, especially for art designed to rot away anyway.

The actual goals and desired designs really do have such a huge impact on medium choice on something like this.

Is the heart of the goal to provide very simple artistic displays in nature, without negatively impacting the local environment? If so then polishing a face of local stone to laser etch the artwork might actually end up being your most environmentally friendly option when all factors get boiled down - After all, its literally local stone from the environment with no additives, with no impact as it slowly gets buried by nature, and would be unlikely to require further resource usage to replace or refresh during the lifetime of an art display.

Or maybe the artistic goal is to embrace the fleeting nature of time in some way, where some kind of thin rice paper that will dissolve and decay shortly after the first time it gets hit with rain would be far more fitting.

 

[Doremus Scudder]

Stencil and/or half-tone screen and some red ocher? (Preferably sprayed from your mouth a lá Cro Magnon man...)

 

[jsmoove]

What kind of resolution are you looking for/what sort of image do you wish to reproduce?

How long do you need it to last, and under what conditions?

How long after End-of-Service-Life do you want the material to be "gone"?

Long time since I posted this, but im looking for something as high resolution as a film negative.
Doesn't matter how long it lasts, preferably at least a day
Compostable within a month or two?
Or never? Depends on if its inert, like glass
I had considered etching in glass, such as https://www.femtoprint.ch, or even
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foturan
but I think the cost for prototypes is probably pretty expensive
Just didn't want to litter with plastic, especially these days

 

[Kino]

Biodegradeable plastic, etched with a laser?

 

[Sirius Glass]

Is there such a thing? (other than paper)

Exactly why would anyone even think of such a thing when we want archival negatives and slides? Really?

 

[jsmoove]

I guess I am wanting a glass now that I think about it, but not coated, rather the glass itself storing the image....so photosensitive glass seems to be the way to go, for full inertness and high resolutions.
Theres this "polychromatic glass" https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmats.2016.00037/full
But I dont see much on the subject these days.
There would also be the bubblegram, but I don't think the resolution of a bubblegram is very high compared to a negative.

 

[koraks]

Hoe about hardened gelatin with a dye image embedded into it? Could be done similar to a carbon transfer print.

 

[jsmoove]

@koraks That sounds intriguing! How would one go about getting a dye image inside the gelatin?
My knowledge of alternative processes is limited haha
I definitely want it to be more of a solid thing, and I dont want to layer, so having dye inside hard gelatin sounds interesting

 

[koraks]

Well, it would involve layering; one layer of clear gelatin as a support and another layer of varying thickness (in accordance with image density) of a dye colored gelatin. The dye could be replaced by eg lamp black and it would still be "biodegradable". But I posted my idea at the same time when you indicated that you'd actually prefer a glass (non degrading) concept...
You could still do an emulsion on glass of course.

 

[jsmoove]

@koraks True, glass isn't non degrading. But it is inert at least!
Id be curious to see this dye colored gelatin though, I wonder what kind of resolutions you could get ?
Reminds me of this edible retroreflector made of agar: , perhaps agar could be an alternative to gelatin too
I think something singular and solid is what im after though,
Photosensitive glass seems very interesting, but not very common and probably expensive.

 

[koraks]

Id be curious to see this dye colored gelatin though, I wonder what kind of resolutions you could get ?

Look at any carbon transfer image. Resolution is high when it's done right; more than the naked eye can resolve. But it's an involved/complex process, and the result will not be monolithic.

 

[mitorn]

Cellulose triacetate is biodegradable...at least in theory: http://www2.ictp.csic.es/qm/fq/publicaciones/2009/IBB_CTA_SPaucm_2009.pdf

 

[jsmoove]

Apart from being very expensive (to say the least!) resolution test targets seem to offer very high resolutions, and use chrome on a glass substrate
http://www.mitani-micro.co.jp/en/mask/photo.html#022
Eh, out of range.

 

[jsmoove]

@mitorn Safety film right? Where does one obtain it?

 

[mshchem]

Go to any big supermarket and you can get edible ink jet cake frosting for any occasion. Any digital copy can be printed. Put cakes in trees. You might end up in the loony bin, but sacrifices must be made.

You could write a song.

MacArthur's Park is melting in the dark
All the sweet, green icing flowing down
Someone left the cake out in the rain
I don't think that I can take it
'Cause it took so long to bake it
And I'll never have that recipe again
Oh, no

 

[jsmoove]

Absolute genius. Do you think one could put a cake in a large format camera and expose it?

 

[mitorn]

@mitorn Safety film right? Where does one obtain it?

https://www.prizmagraphics.co.uk/artcel-triacetate-crystal-clear-film-135-mu-a3-15-sheets
If I am not mistaken most film should be coated on triacetate, so if you want to use analog materials you could stick stick with them. Keep in mind, although some material are biodegradeable it might take years till they are completely gone.
An other option might be uncoated Cellophane, or thin paper.

 

[mitorn]

I guess I am wanting a glass now that I think about it, but not coated, rather the glass itself storing the image....so photosensitive glass seems to be the way to go, for full inertness and high resolutions....

There are a tworeasons against glass:
1. It can start forest fires
2. It can break and people or animals can cut themselves with the shards.

 

[jsmoove]

@mitorn Are there any modern cellulose acetate based films though out there?
Thats true about fires, I think as long as it isnt a ball or a prism it should likely be ok ?
Not to make things even more complicated, but my original plan for this project was indeed to use a ball lens of high refractive index (2) so that I could focus on the opposing surface, like a stanhope. I was thinking of etching an image into the lens. That whole idea is too expensive, both ball lenses and stanhopes.
I could use a triplet lens and elongate it somehow. Or a fixed focus loupe with a bottom reticle. I'm just uncertain how im going to go about putting the image on either since I want it to be all one piece/less pieces/less processes.
The idea was to create these viewers that have an image in them that I can scatter in my city without littering. The pieces would be imaged by a cellphone.
I just don't want to use regular film even though it works juts fine...

 

[focus_on_infinity]

Absolute genius. Do you think one could put a cake in a large format camera and expose it?

I believe all cakes are large format. The problem is that once you eat it, it's mostly permanent.