Carbon printing process question

[MTGseattle]

I may have asked @Andrew O'Neill this question offline but I cannot remember what his experience was so I will ask the group at large.

What is the longevity of final sized support mediums and pre-sensitized tissues? Is it recommended to get some stuff pre-made, or do these materials get strange quickly?

I'm planning on Acrylic sizing of the art papers for now. I may just coat one and let it hang in a corner for a while and see if anything interesting happens. It's all artist grade archival stuff, so I don't think anything will go awry but who knows.
I will likely end up using some fixed out photo paper too as it works out to be cheaper which shocked the S--T out of me. Arches Platine (22x30) when you divide by 2 costs double what Foma VC FB Matte in 11x14 costs. I realize that Platine was developed specifically for the Alt process community, but some of the other "high-end" water color and printing papers are not much cheaper.

I have the revised Luis Nadeau book, and I've been waffling on the new Sandy King,etc book.

 

[koraks]

What is the longevity of final sized support mediums and pre-sensitized tissues? Is it recommended to get some stuff pre-made, or do these materials get strange quickly?

Sized final supports have a virtually indefinite lifetime, which is certainly true for gelatin-sized papers, and I imagine acrylic, too. I've never had much luck with acrylic sizing, but for others it's a bulletproof system. You'll find that with carbon, everyone has their own way of doing things. The processes of no two practitioners are the same.

Pre-sensitized tissue depends on the sensitizer. With dichromate, it's a couple of hours, and in fact, sensitivity and contrast start to shift the moment you sensitize them. DAS-sensitized tissues stay constant for months or years. There are people still printing on 20+=year old 'UltraStable' DAS carbon tissue. With dichromate, I'd just forget about pre-sensitizing anything; if you want to achieve any kind of consistency/predictability, you'll have to sensitize as needed and keep your process reasonably controlled.

This is one of the main reasons I switched to DAS; it makes it possible to bath-produce pre-sensitized tissue that performs consistently over the months to follow. Keep in mind that with DAS you're limited to double transfers as a single transfer (at least onto paper) will leave you with a heavy and unremovable stain. Transfers to an acrylic/PET intermediate support can be cleared with potassium permanganate and bisulfite, and then transferred to the final support. Personally, I prefer this workflow also for other reasons (e.g. cleaning up edges etc.).

I've been waffling on the new Sandy King,etc book

That's a nice one to get started. Certainly recommended.
There's also a carbon printing group on groups.io; there's a couple of knowledgeable people on there who aren't (anymore) on Photrio: https://groups.io/g/carbon/topics
And there's the alt photo list that draws a little more traffic, but its scope is broader, but still many carbon/pigment printers on there: https://groups.io/g/altphotolist/topics

And yes, good paper can be expensive. But especially with carbon, you have so many options. I prefer fairly subtly-textured etching papers, and they turn out to be quite affordable, too. With papers like Arches Platine, you pay for a large extent for reputation/brand. Sure, it's a fine paper, but there are equally fine papers out there that don't get mentioned in every post on alt. process printing and as a result, they turn out to cost only 25% as much...

 

[Rick A]

Buy Sandy King's book.
I pour my own tissues, customize my colors and sensitize as needed for use. I use "in camera" negatives and do my best to expose properly to get the print. I mostly use fixed out photo paper for the final transfer, but have on occasion used acrylic to size art paper.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

I may have asked @Andrew O'Neill this question offline but I cannot remember what his experience was so I will ask the group at large.

What is the longevity of final sized support mediums and pre-sensitized tissues? Is it recommended to get some stuff pre-made, or do these materials get strange quickly?

I'm planning on Acrylic sizing of the art papers for now. I may just coat one and let it hang in a corner for a while and see if anything interesting happens. It's all artist grade archival stuff, so I don't think anything will go awry but who knows.
I will likely end up using some fixed out photo paper too as it works out to be cheaper which shocked the S--T out of me. Arches Platine (22x30) when you divide by 2 costs double what Foma VC FB Matte in 11x14 costs. I realize that Platine was developed specifically for the Alt process community, but some of the other "high-end" water color and printing papers are not much cheaper.

I have the revised Luis Nadeau book, and I've been waffling on the new Sandy King,etc book.

Acrylic sized papers will last indefinitely. Pre-sensitised tissues will suffer what's known as the dark effect if they are not used in a timely fashion. I have pre-sensitised tissues, dried, slipped into a black plastic photo paper bag, then into the freezer. This will delay the dark effect. I printed on a tissue that had been in the freezer a few months, without issue.
Starting on fixed out photo paper is smart. It eliminates the paper sizing variable. It's really hard to beat matte fibre.

 

[koraks]

Buy Sandy King's book.

Yeah, it's useful.
One minor gripe with it, though...the print quality. My copy is inkjet printed, poorly so, with inks that smudge when moisture hits the paper. Think 1998 inkjet quality; really poor. This really compromises the second part of the book where the work of contemporary artists is showcased, but it also affects the other examples. I guess decent print quality would have raised the price substantially, but I have to admit it was a bit of a letdown when I first opened it.

 

[MTGseattle]

I realize that I used a poor choice of words in my first post. Non- sensitized tissue is what I mean. Having some made up and sensitizing only for an actual transfer session. That should be fine right? My reasoning: make up some final support options and some tissues over the course of the weekday evenings, sensitize some sheets on Friday evening, then jump into actual exposure and transfer on Saturday and Sunday.
It spreads work out over a whole week, but in much smaller chunks than say starting from scratch on Saturday morning.


I really appreciate the responses. I've seen the groups.io and fumbled around in the archive a bit, but my searches were awkward.

@Andrew O'Neill I noticed a step wedge type thing creeping into a couple of your videos. Is this yet another example showing that I should really buy a couple of the Stouffer products?

@koraks That's a let down of sorts as it's not a cheap book comparatively speaking.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Yeah, it's useful.
One minor gripe with it, though...the print quality. My copy is inkjet printed, poorly so, with inks that smudge when moisture hits the paper. Think 1998 inkjet quality; really poor. This really compromises the second part of the book where the work of contemporary artists is showcased, but it also affects the other examples. I guess decent print quality would have raised the price substantially, but I have to admit it was a bit of a letdown when I first opened it.

Holy smokes, really? My copy is pretty decent.

 

[Rick A]

Yeah, it's useful.
One minor gripe with it, though...the print quality. My copy is inkjet printed, poorly so, with inks that smudge when moisture hits the paper. Think 1998 inkjet quality; really poor. This really compromises the second part of the book where the work of contemporary artists is showcased, but it also affects the other examples. I guess decent print quality would have raised the price substantially, but I have to admit it was a bit of a letdown when I first opened it.

Yes, his first book is like you say, but the new edition was printed by Focal Press and is far better quality.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1759734-REG/focal_press_9781138353831_carbon_transfer_printing_a.html

 

[koraks]

Unsensitized tissue will keep for...a long time. Don't worry about it. Several months at least, and with proper storage, years.

I should really buy a couple of the Stouffer products?

You're in the US, so shipping costs are low. Yes, do yourself a favor and get yourself at least a 21-step. Even if it's the cheap, uncalibrated one, it gives you a bit of a benchmark to compare your own process against what you read in books etc.

Holy smokes, really? My copy is pretty decent.

Hmm...I suspect the European distribution may rely on a print-on-demand fulfillment to prevent printed copies to be shopped across the globe. Pity, because it's really, really bad. Seriously, my old Epson produces better prints on plain copier paper.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1759734-REG/focal_press_9781138353831_carbon_transfer_printing_a.html

That's the one I have.

 

[MTGseattle]

Thank you all.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

I realize that I used a poor choice of words in my first post. Non- sensitized tissue is what I mean. Having some made up and sensitizing only for an actual transfer session. That should be fine right? My reasoning: make up some final support options and some tissues over the course of the weekday evenings, sensitize some sheets on Friday evening, then jump into actual exposure and transfer on Saturday and Sunday.
It spreads work out over a whole week, but in much smaller chunks than say starting from scratch on Saturday morning.


I really appreciate the responses. I've seen the groups.io and fumbled around in the archive a bit, but my searches were awkward.

@Andrew O'Neill I noticed a step wedge type thing creeping into a couple of your videos. Is this yet another example showing that I should really buy a couple of the Stouffer products?

@koraks That's a let down of sorts as it's not a cheap book comparatively speaking.

I would be weary of the dark effect. I'm not sure when it'll kick in, though. I'd place the sensitised tissue when they have dried (I always give mine 2 to 3 hours depending on RH) into light tight black plastic photo paper bags, then put in the freezer. After you take them out of the freezer, let them sit (in the bag) for about half an hour, then expose to your negative.
Was the step wedge a square-ish one?

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Like koraks says, unsensitised tissue can keep for a long time. How long? I don't know for certain, but I did print on one that I found in the back of a drawer that must have been in there for several years. Worked fine other than it took longer in the development bath. Personally, I like to make enough tissue for one session. That's usually two.

 

[koraks]

sensitize some sheets on Friday evening, then jump into actual exposure and transfer on Saturday and Sunday.

That sounds sketchy; sorry I missed that. No, I wouldn't do it like that. With dichromate spirit sensitization, you really want to sensitize, let dry and then expose as soon as it's dry. This depends on working conditions, weather etc.


As for the book, this is what I have:

This is a sample of the print quality on one of the illustrations on calibration:

The smaller text in the illustrations is virtually unreadable.

This is an illustration of DAS sensitizer stain:

The inkjet dither pattern is visible with the naked eye. The text reads fine, but the images are all low density with poor tonal separation.
The color reproduction quality is hilariously bad. Newspapers are better printed these days.

 

[MTGseattle]

Routledge is having a sale. Bummer about the print quality. I wonder how many copies per run? Maybe there was a bad run, or a few bad copies?
We'll see how mine ends up.

Point taken regarding letting the sensitized tissue sit too long. I had forgotten the general dry-time. My basement is cool and relatively dry, I was allowing some extra time but overnight might be too risky? Sensitize on Saturday morning then or the morning of whatever day I plan on doing transfers.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Ideally, you want to print as soon as the sensitised tissues have dried...But... you can put them in the freezer, as outlined above. I've done it. It's fine.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

This is what I do. On week days, as soon as I come home from work (and I use the term work, loosely as most of the time I find myself as a glorified babysitter/attendance taker ), I'll sensitise a tissue, and lay first coat of acrylic medium on the substrate. Every 15 min, I go back in the darkroom, and lay another acrylic coating down, for a total of 4 ( I only do this if I haven't pre-coated paper before hand). After 3 hours (sometimes 2, depending on the RH), I expose the tissue to the negative. The longest the sensitised tissue sits before use is 2 to 3 hours. It's surprising how quickly 3 hours can pass by! There are times when I just don't have time, so I'll sensitise a tissue, and pop it into the freezer so that I can print when more time presents itself.

 

[MTGseattle]

Here's another question. This is not meant to poo-poo any process. What do people think about water usage for a Carbon transfer session vs. traditional printing session? I feel like they're probably close depending upon your archival wash system if doing fiber prints.

 

[koraks]

That's a pretty complicated question, really. It depends on many factors, and this makes me wonder if it's really a very useful question to try and answer (although I do understand why you'd ask it!)

Let's define a traditional printing session as silver gelatin - ok?

For one thing, it depends on how extensively you wash your prints. If you print (silver gel) on RC paper, not a lot of wash is needed, which saves a lot of water, potentially. FB paper will require more water, although total volume is much less relevant than flow or changes of water. You can actually wash pretty efficiently if you use a small volume and replace it a couple of times. This goes for any kind of wash - film, RC paper, FB paper, alt. process prints...

Having said that, a carbon transfer print doesn't require all that much of a wash. There's no fixer etc. to wash out of the print and there's also no risk of silvering out etc. There is water used in other steps; e.g. the initial soak / mating bath and warm water development, and of course in making the glop/tissue. For mating and warm water development, you can get away with a fairly small volume; I generally use 1.5 liters for a single 8x10" print for all steps from the initial soak through warm water development. I generally finish development with another warm water bath at maybe 750ml, and then a single final rinse at something similar. So let's say I use 4 liters of water in making an 8x10" carbon transfer, if I limit the scope to just the print. I could very effectively wash a single 8x10" silver gelatin FB print in the same volume of water. IN practice, I probably use less, since I'd rarely make a single print at a time and my water use will be more efficient if I combine several prints together in a session. This works with FB, but not with carbon. Those are one at a time.

However, I doubt that water use is really the important factor to focus on. How about energy? For making a carbon transfer print, I heat my glop to somewhere around 50C and keep it there for a few hours. I probably use up to a few kWh for that. I never really measured it, but it'll depend also on season (temperature), how long I wait for the glop to offgas etc. Then, for warm-water bath development, I boil about 800ml of water for an 8x10" print using an electric boiler. You could fairly precisely estimate how much energy that takes. We do get some of our electricity from solar panels, but how do I fold that into the calculation...? And I run a dehumidifier when drying my tissues overnight, which also eats up a decent amount of power.

With FB and RC paper, I don't have most of these energy costs - but this is only because they're expended by the manufacturer. How efficient are they? Surely, a lot more efficient than I am. But what exactly is their environmental impact?

And when I've figured all that out, how does water use relate to other kinds of impact of the printing process? Do we include waste management and potential silver recovery (or discharge into a sewer system!?) as well?

Before you know it, you're in the process of making an LCA for a print. This can be very interesting, and sure enough, this kind of work is being done in the printing industry. But to do it for home-made alt. process prints would (1) never yield a clear-cut answer because working methods and a host of other factors vary so much, (2) you'll have to make a host of assumptions and those assumptions can turn out to entirely tilt the outcome of the analysis in the end, and don't forget that (3) you lose a lot of perfectly good printing time figuring out how to weigh the different factors!

So yes, I do understand your question about water use, but I feel I have to raise some considerations relating to the feasibility of answering it, and the relevance of whatever answer we might arrive it. It's a simple answer, but underneath hides an extremely complex set of issues.

Instead, I'd propose the following: be mindful of what you do, and do the best job you can in making what you feel are the right decisions. There's not a whole lot more you can, or IMO should do.

The print with the least impact is the print that isn't made. Sadly, it's not much to look at!

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

My prints get a good rinse after development (fill tray dump fill tray dump method), followed by a soak in cold water for a few minutes before being hung up to dry. Easy peasy.

 

[Vaughn]

Routledge is having a sale. Bummer about the print quality. I wonder how many copies per run? Maybe there was a bad run, or a few bad copies?
We'll see how mine ends up.

Point taken regarding letting the sensitized tissue sit too long. I had forgotten the general dry-time. My basement is cool and relatively dry, I was allowing some extra time but overnight might be too risky? Sensitize on Saturday morning then or the morning of whatever day I plan on doing transfers.

I often sensitize (dichromate) late in the evening, hang the tissues to dry with a fan on them, and put them all in a box in the morning and start printing. The printing sessions are often all day, so some tissue has been sensitized and dry for well over 12 hours before they get exposed.

No issues except the developing can take a little longer as the tissue ages.

I had a tissue mated for over 12 hours before developing -- that was a little more difficult to develop, but the dark reaction was not as strong as the actual exposure so I was able to eventually get the unexposed gelatin off the print. not recommended.

 

[MTGseattle]

Thank you all. The water usage was pure curiosity and not a concern or deterrent for me. I try and be logical regarding my overall water usage aside from photography and save here and there which allows me to mentally forgive myself for some of the wastefulness I may exhibit in other areas.
I think about waste/environmental concerns, but I'm not going to let those concerns derail a creative pursuit.

 

[koraks]

That pretty much sums up my attitude as well!

 

[Rick A]

The most water usage I've encountered was four 2 liter tray fill and dumps to fully clear a print using 115-120f water, normal is three, then a one liter cold rinse to set the gelatin. I use a 16x20 inch tray to process 11x14 final support for 8x10 negatives.

 

[MTGseattle]

Gelatin: I've looked through a lot of product data. I cannot find a "bloom rating" on any of the food service brands of gelatin. The only "rated" gelatins I have found are those sold by photographer's formulary and Blick. What gives?
Has anyone seen a "Bloom rating" for good old Knox gelatin? I will likely buy it on Amazon, as I don't have any local groceries that stock gelatin in anything other than the Knox 1 ounce envelopes.

 

[koraks]

I don't know about the US market. Around here I can find quite a few food-grade gelatins for which a bloom number is provided.

However, don't get too hung up on the bloom thing. It's not all that important. Other than a few very soggy gels with an abnormally low bloom rating, anything will work.

The very low bloom gelatins (i.e. 120 and lower) are generally not sold as foods because of their low gel strength, which mostly defies the purpose. Most gelatins I've seen are in the 160-220 bloom region, which is fine. Lower-grade technical gelatins can be on the lower end of the scale; the food-grade bovine gelatins I've bought so far tend to be 200+ bloom. I think Knox bovine gel is around 220 or so, too. Again, it's not all that important.

Edit: oh hey, here you go, this is what Google turns up:

Gelatin

Gelatin (sometimes gelatine) is a common gelling agent and thickener that most people are familiar with. It is flavorless, colorless and brittle when dry. In its pure form, gelatin comes either as gelatin sheets, or as powder. Generally, it is made from animal bones and collagen, the most common...

www.chefsteps.com

Knox is listed at 225
I don't think I've ever come across a 'bronze' food-grade gelatin. I do have a technical grade gelatin that's 180 or so. I know there's a restoration gelatin that's very low bloom; I think 120 or thereabouts. I've never seen it in real life but I don't doubt you could make a carbon print with it.