Contact printing Weston Style (aka w/ a lightbulb)

The picture is about the picture, not the paper it was printed on. All else is personal preference and we will never all agree. Period.

If someone believes that their process is the cat's meow to making the best prints they can make, then why stop them from thinking so? Because it probably is true!
But that doesn't discount all other methods out there. I have seen many photographs in my day, and I never even reflect upon what kind of paper was used, or what chemistry. I have seen many photography shows where digital prints far surpassed analog prints, simply because they were better pictures, better thought out, better composed, had more emotional impact, etc.

Any aspiring photographer should know that consistency in using your materials, and learning HOW to use them in order to yield prints that are satisfying, is the way to work. Stop chasing silver bullets. Chase subject matter. Chase light. Chase expression. Chase your soul. But do NOT chase silver bullets.
I have no problem admitting that Michael Smith's prints are excellent, (although I prefer Paula Chamlee's pictures). But so are Bill Schwab's. One set are made with Azo/Lodima in Amidol and ULF negs. The other set is made from a Hasselblad with off the shelf materials (literally materials I can buy around the corner in Minneapolis). What gives? It's NOT about the stupid materials! It's about HOW you use them and what you do with them. df cardwells photographs are fantastic works of art too, he's a master portraitist.

What these three photographers and artists have in common is that they know their materials inside and out; they know exactly what they are capable of, and are able to extract the most of them. THAT is the common denominator.

Just get over it and get back to what really matters. CONTENT. And let's help the original poster with his quest to get his printing on a roll.

Ah, my comment to Heath. I do remember that one. Had you bothered to read all of Heath's previous comments you might have understood mine. I received a number of private emails after that telling me they were pleased with my comment as Heath had been a problem for many. I did not know that, never having read any of his postings on any other thread

And my comment to Andrew Moxon was a comment to him and by extension to others as well. It is amazing to me that folks call something "hype" before they try it. If, after they try something, and assuming they know how to use the material (a big assumption as many think they really know how to handle certain materials, but in reality do not), they find it lacking, then, yes, if they want to call claims for the paper "hype" they could certainly do so. But comments like that are routinely made by folks who have not tried the product. As such, those comments are indeed worthless.

In other fields, folks look to those who have experience before they trust their recommendations and their comments. In photography forums, and I suspect in others as well, although I do not participate in other forums, all comments are often treated equally, regardless of the experience of those making them.

There are a many things about photography that I do not know, but there are some things I know very deeply. Those are what I confine my comments to. It continues to amaze me that people who have never made a contact print on silver chloride paper even bother to read the threads about it (since it appears they have no interest in ever using that type of paper), let alone comment on it. Why do they bother?

Michael A. Smith

Working in a well-lit darkroom is one of the pleasures of using Lodima. With a water bath, I can squeegee the print once removed from water bath; and apply developer locally using a cotton swab to areas that still need further development. This would be nearly impossible with regular enlarging paper.

Lodima also responds well to pre-flashing whether to a particular area or overall. I use a Besseler audible timer for flashing since it enables 1/10's of a second control.

Lodima can produce excellent results with developers other than Amidol. I especially prefer the ease of use of Ansco PF 130.

Without M&P's willingness to expend time, money and effort into bringing Lodima to fruition, discussions on Weston's techniques would be only of historical interest. If this expression of appreciation makes me a cult member, I plead guilty.

I do have to add that its curious how a discussion of printing Weston-style attracts posters who clearly have no interest in the subject. If I see a discussion on how to do wet-plate collodian, for example, I would not bother reading it. Not because I disrespect the posters who are concerned with collodian; but rather I have no intent of trying that method. I guess this is one of the downsides of having an all-encompassing forum such as APUG. A forum dedicated to a specific method doesn't normally attract spurious postings.

And while I'm ranting, I do have to say that accusations of cultism are insulting. This whole site is built on a cult following - that analog photography methods/equipment are superior or at least preferred. And there are a number of sub-cults here, eg the Leica cult/sub-forum. Maybe we should only have membership in sub-forums and only those true believers can enter. Others can throw rocks/insults from the Lounge. It would certainly be preferred to intellectually dishonest disparagements of those who prefer lodima/amidol/pyro.

So much for trying to bring it back on an even keel.

doughowk said:

And while I'm ranting, I do have to say that accusations of cultism are insulting. This whole site is built on a cult following - that analog photography methods/equipment are superior or at least preferred. And there are a number of sub-cults here, eg the Leica cult/sub-forum.

Click to expand...

um... so you're saying it's ok to call call some of the discussion forums here cults... (especially those crazy Leica-ites )

I hate those looney bastards too.

All this is great news to me; I thought I was just buying paper. I didn’t know that I was going to be in a club.

How Freaking cool is that!

Maybe some black jackets with “Beyond Black” on the back. Hey Doug I could run up to Jacks and we could work on a secret hand shake…Man O Man this rocks!

I only hope that one day my work will advance to the point that there will be this many fellow professionals jealous and envious of its mere existences.

Hey MS, if I double down on my order will you through in a patch (for the jacket)

James T. Kirk stands, feet a little wider than shoulder width apart, chest out, head slightly turned, chin up, looking serious. "Bones....are there....any signs of life?....what does.....your scanner say?"

Bones looks intently at his scanner. "No sign of life in the gelatinous heap, Jim." The heap quivers as the doctor pushes his finger against the mass.

James T. Kirk turns with dramatic flair, looking sadly at the pulverized heap, " My god Spock...... who...... could do this.... to.... to a living creature. What....could it have....been?" Kirk turns and assumes the dramatic pose the scene opened with.

"This, was a horse, Captain. Quite obviously beaten again and again by photographers on an internet forum."

Kirk seemingly stuck in the opening pose "Internet?"

Spock looking like spock always does, "Ancient form of communication dedicated to specific topics and interests."

Once again Kirk turns dramatically to look at the fleshy heap, "Photographers.....Spock?"

Spock still exhibiting his spockness, "It is logical capitan. Those black spots on the dead animal are flash burns."

BOOM! "AAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHGGGGHHHHH" A member of the landing party wearing a red shirt goes up in flames.

Kirk, whirling into a cat like crouch with phaser out, "My god.... what... was that.... spock?"

"Those same photographers are flaming each other, captain. The dead ensign got caught in the cross fire"

"Bones....Can you save him?" Kirk looks dramatically at the dead red shirted Ensign

"He's dead Jim!"

hey guys,

my original reason for starting this discussion is primarily TO GET INFO ON THE BASICS OF CONTACT PRINTING. the reason I chose the title "contact printing weston style" is plainly because I admired the simplicity of how Weston printed, and the beautiful work that he churned out over the years. I also don't have a darkroom set up at home, barely the space to keep trays(11x14 max) and bottles of chems. I'm from a 4 child, 6 person home, so space is limited! I don't have the luxury of having a glorious darkroom like some of you have, heck, my enlarger and timers,grain focusers, etc. are in the garage all boxed up ! So I've decided to start with a simple 'clamp-light' with a 7.5watt halogen bulb in it. Total cost for two of the lights, 7.5watt bulb and a safelight bulb(red)? about $25. so doing quality printing in a CHEAP($$$ wise) is my goal. just like Weston

I've decided that I'd like to spend more time with LF, getting to really know WHAT DRIVES ME as a photographer, and at the same time, using the best materials and tools that I can afford. But being that I would like to print at home, in the 2nd bathroom(after everyone else has gone to bed) so I can have some alone time to myself, rather than being with others in the darkroom at school.

I'm still trying to convince my parents that I really want to do this, they are still not totally into the idea of chemicals unknown to them being poored down the drain, and they still have the notion in their heads that I will be using 10k gallons of H2O a night during a printing session. I won't .

I'm sad to see that some people have seen this thread as a platform to bellow as loud as they can their opinions, when no one has asked. but I do appreciate those of you who have given me some terrific information into materials I want to eventually try out.

Michael A. : I will try Lodima one of these days, after I've gotten settled into contact printing with traditional silver papers. At this time, I simply can't afford the paper . I've been graciously gifted a good assortment of Ilford and *some*(25-50shts) of Agfa FB paper. I'll be starting with this....

but I will try Lodima as soon as my student budget can allow it .


so please, can we keep this thread ON TRACK and leave our opinions in their place, unless specifically asked? its not that I don't appreciate your experience or results with it, but some(other than myself) feel that you might be attacking them personally. I don't know any of you on here personally(well, maybe 1, but not really), but I would like to get to know some of you even better.

I've gleaned SOOOO much info from this site over the last year, and its been a great resource for me. But as I tighten my spending on toys and new cameras, and get down to making quality images, I need solid materials, and the best I can afford.


Lodima, please wait a little longer. I'll be calling your name eventually .

MAS, thanks for your insight! I've been directed to your forum on your site, and I've started reading through it, along with the articles and 'writings' on your site. Blessings to you and Paula.

please, lets keep this thread going. Even though I'm not technically "up and running" yet, I'd still love to retain as much info and experience from you all that you're willing to lend!

Thanks all,


Daniel Stone

Daniel.

I can appreciate your frustration. If you are of the mind, contact me 'off list' with your home address and I will
forward you a dozen or so sheets of Azo (Grade 2) that are presently resting quietly in my freezer. They are a bit 'old'.. from about 1980.. but having, in the past, used Azo that was over 25 years old (unrefrigerated), it worked well.
From that experience I will assume that the couple of boxes that presently reside in my freezer should work well enough
to give you a 'feel' for a chloride paper.

Ken

Daniel,

Contact me by email and I will see that you get some of the Lodima paper. And then give me a call and I will help you through the process--and talk to your folks if you think that would be helpful. Nothing in the chemicals is toxic. I can assure them of that.

Time for you to get started printing.

Michael A. Smith

Daniel,

PLEASE take Ken and Michael up on their offers. I started contact printing with a fancy Zone VI VC head and VC paper using Dektol. I can't imagine a bigger waste of time, materials and $$. DON'T do it!!!!!!

If you will PM me your address, I'll pitch in with some Neutol WA developer. I'd send you some Amidol, but the Neutol is ALMOST as good and easier to get started with in my opinion. While I use Michael Smith's Amidol all the time in my darkroom, I keep the Neutol around in case I just want to do a quick proof or test or something and don't want to mix up a liter of Amidol.

There is a reason why Michael Smith has a "cult" (someone else's term, not mine) following. Because it is an inexpensive, EASY, repeatable way to get excellent prints. While it's NOT the only way to get there it certainly is a very good way. And the Azo Forum is a gold mine of information! If you read the posts by my fellow Azo/Lodima "cult" (there's that word again) members you will see words like "easy" or "cheating". Peter Schrager says using Azo is like cheating because, once you start to learn the materials, it is SO EASY to obtain a fine print. Bruce Barlow says he can get to a final print in about 2-3 sheets of Azo vs 4-7 sheets with other papers. I too, often get to final prints in 3 sheets of Azo. You can control contrast by using a water bath.

Do yourself a favor and check out, on the Azo Forum, discussions about the 300 watt R40 lightbulbs and buy one for yourself. Buylights.com has the best prices. I should know becasue I just purchased some of these bulbs. I'm sure the first time you try to dodge/burn VC paper under a 7.5 watt bulb you will shoot yourself. Slow silver chloride papers under a bright light allow you to SEE the negative. Also, see if you can't rig up a safe light right above the developer tray. A bright safe light will allow you to SEE what is going on in the developer so you will know when to pull a print to put in the water bath. I love my Thomas Safe Light, but they can be a little hard to hang in mom's bathroom.

Your current negatives, might not be best suited to the negatives that work best with Azo/Lodima, so I would recommend you read up on the various Pyro developers. You can order Pyrocat-HD (my favorite) pre-mixed from Photographers Formulary. It is really cheap when you consider how much developer can be mixed from 500ml of stock solution and when mixed with Glycol will keep on your shelf almost forever.

Good luck Daniel and enjoy the journey!

thanks ken, MAS and JGJBOWEN,

I really appreciate your answers! I just realized that this thread got out of hand, and I wanted to get it back on track .

what is the reasoning for using pyro developers? after a while, does the staining effect on the negs go away/fade? Do different variations of pyro (weston's formula, standard pyro, pyrocat hd, etc...)? what differs in them?

I've been using HC-110 and D-76 1:1 up until now for all my b/w film, what does the pyro do(besides staining, which helps keep highlights from blowing out?)

I'm a complete novice in all of this, as you might already can assume . But I'm eager to learn, and wanting to start creating some art!

blessings to all of you!

jg, MAS, and KenS, I've sent you all PM's regarding what you offered.

Blessings,

Dan

This is a really entertaining thread. Keep it going!

It is not whether you are part of a cult, it is whether you are in the right cult.

Stick it to those uppity Leica guys. Yeah!!!

Dan,

The staining properties of pyro developers are different from developer to developer, but the main idea is how blue sensitive contact papers react to the color of the stain, which then acts as a contrast enhancer.
It can sometimes mask grain as well, although while contact printing, grain isn't going to be an issue.

I wish you the best of luck in your endeavor, but it looks as though you're in good hands, so I will rest assured that you will be well taken very good care of. Remember to experiment; but don't stray with your materials too much. Consistency really is the ticket to amazing prints, and a constructive and critical thought process about pushing the boundaries and limits of what's available to you. You learn more by screwing up sometimes than if you get it right all the time.

- Thomas

DanielStone said:

thanks ken, MAS and JGJBOWEN,

I really appreciate your answers! I just realized that this thread got out of hand, and I wanted to get it back on track .

what is the reasoning for using pyro developers? after a while, does the staining effect on the negs go away/fade? Do different variations of pyro (weston's formula, standard pyro, pyrocat hd, etc...)? what differs in them?

I've been using HC-110 and D-76 1:1 up until now for all my b/w film, what does the pyro do(besides staining, which helps keep highlights from blowing out?)

I'm a complete novice in all of this, as you might already can assume . But I'm eager to learn, and wanting to start creating some art!

blessings to all of you!

jg, MAS, and KenS, I've sent you all PM's regarding what you offered.

Blessings,

Dan

Click to expand...

Dave Pritchard said:

This is a really entertaining thread. Keep it going!

It is not whether you are part of a cult, it is whether you are in the right cult.

Stick it to those uppity Leica guys. Yeah!!!

Click to expand...

leica's are nice, but deardorff's are better !

I'm in the market soon for a Dear. V8, with a 300mm and a 165 S.A.(eventually).

maybe also with a 4x5 red. back....

central cali here I come .

-Dan

Thomas Bertilsson said:

Dan,

The staining properties of pyro developers are different from developer to developer, but the main idea is how blue sensitive contact papers react to the color of the stain, which then acts as a contrast enhancer.
It can sometimes mask grain as well, although while contact printing, grain isn't going to be an issue.

I wish you the best of luck in your endeavor, but it looks as though you're in good hands, so I will rest assured that you will be well taken very good care of. Remember to experiment; but don't stray with your materials too much. Consistency really is the ticket to amazing prints, and a constructive and critical thought process about pushing the boundaries and limits of what's available to you. You learn more by screwing up sometimes than if you get it right all the time.

- Thomas

Click to expand...

thanks Thomas, I'm trying to find a copy of G.H.'s "book of pyro"

its out of print, right?

-Dan

Pyro is not wysiwyg. For those who use Pyro, how are you judging the proper print exposure? A UV Densitometer? Except for a brief attempt with Pyro, I've been using Rodinal for my negs; and the contrast range seems good for Lodima as well as pt/pd. I do use a regular densitometer for it cuts down on the number of working prints needed to get to a final print. A regular densitometer can be acquired rather cheaply off the auction site; but you can also use a light table and step wedge for a visual determination. Create a mask with two holes - one for step wedge and other for your negative. Visually pick the highest density of your neg and compare it to the step wedge. Keep notes, and when you've achieved good exposure for a print, use the neg reading as a guide for future prints.

DanielStone said:

unfortunately, I can't afford to run any other alt. processes right now. my budget is REALLY thin

eventually though!

-Dan

Click to expand...

a bit off topic, but one way to save cash is to buy Xray film instead of brand name sheet film. its just regular ortho film that is incredibly cheap, available in large sizes, and easy to work with.