Cyanotype and Polaroid Type 55 Negatives

Anyone tried Type 55 neg.s for contact printing cyanotypes?

I haven't used Type 55 for a long time, but I do remember that the best negatives for printing onto a normal paper needed more exposure than the EI that gave the best (Polaroid) print, otherwise the negative was a bit thin. But Cyanotype is very contrasty anyway, so I wondered if the thin negative wouldn't be so bad. Anyone got any suggestions or experience on what EI is best to shoot the Polaroid at, and/or on using Type 55 with Cyanotype more generally?

Thanks much...


Peter

I'd probably start about EI 25 and go for the negative ather than the print. You might also try selenium-toning the negative for awhile to boost the contrast and maximum density.

But, I've also seen some nice cyanotypes from straight type 55 negatives as well.

Another control you have is actually with the cyanotype chemistry. The traditional formula is mixed 1 part A to one part B. Varying that ratio affects print contrast. (I've forgotten which way to go to lower contrast but I think having more ferric ammonium citrate in the working solution lowers the contrast and maximum print density.)

Finally, different papers will print with variations in contrast density and color, so that is also a way to match the process to the negative.

Joe

I got a very nice cyanotype from Art in the last PC exchange printed from a T55 neg, so it will work.

Thanks to both of you who've replied: good to know that this can work well, and to have a starting point for an EI to use.

If I get it working well I want to try doing this as an activity to get everyone involved with when I am tutoring sometime. I thought that in a place with no darkroom it would be a nice way to show everyone a process all the way from camera to print, and maybe to get some of them thinking a bit about alternative processes and just the idea that there's much more than one way to get to a worthwhile end result.

Thanks,


Peter

normal ie for 55

Bandicoot said:

Thanks to both of you who've replied: good to know that this can work well, and to have a starting point for an EI to use.

If I get it working well I want to try doing this as an activity to get everyone involved with when I am tutoring sometime. I thought that in a place with no darkroom it would be a nice way to show everyone a process all the way from camera to print, and maybe to get some of them thinking a bit about alternative processes and just the idea that there's much more than one way to get to a worthwhile end result.

Thanks,


Peter

Click to expand...

haven't used 55 for a while but the selenium intensification was a must for full range prints on rgular bromide projection papers

i used to just use regular dupe line film(direct dupe-neg=neg or pos=pos) to make a higher contrast dupe neg but mostly cause polaroid negs are so fragile-but that would need a darkroom

25-40 was iso used for neg depending on intended use -you might want to try 12 -or extend developement time

why not call polaroid us customer service and ask for sue gagnon-she sells mucho film dirctly to nyc pro's and knows a lot about the 4x5 and 3 1/4x4 1/4 and what folks do with it-don't have her email handy but you can get from polaroid

first i would use comercial blue print paper to get exp and dev time for film

why not use type 51? intended use is graphic arts and neg speed is much higher-80 iso

vaya con dios

Thanks for the contact suggestion Z-Man: I will try Sue and see what she has to say.

I've never used Type 51, I thought that the negative was similar contrast to Type 55, although the print is much higher contrast, but the speed advantage is a good point. I'll probably try Type 55 first as that is what I have on hand, but I'll look into the Type 51 idea.

Thanks,


Peter

polaroid neg material

Bandicoot said:

Thanks for the contact suggestion Z-Man: I will try Sue and see what she has to say.

I've never used Type 51, I thought that the negative was similar contrast to Type 55, although the print is much higher contrast, but the speed advantage is a good point. I'll probably try Type 55 first as that is what I have on hand, but I'll look into the Type 51 idea.

Thanks,


Peter

Click to expand...

neg for 55 is/was(?) panatomic x

neg for 51 is not pan x afaik

ask pe-he knows

vaya con dios