Extremely dilute bleach, water, cotton ball and time. Print should be wet, go very slow. That's a wonderful photo! Of course you could scan and let photoshop do the magic.
I didn't know this was a possibility! In looking at photo chemicals on the website I use, there's no bleach listed. What do you use for this? I assume you're not talking about household bleach...I second the bleach idea, but I'd use a calligraphy brush of the appropriate size. When I deal with things like this, I usually make a number of prints and plan on ruining several in the process. It's a matter of skill and luck. Make your best batch with dodging and then bleach or spot back the prints after drying if needed.
Nice image! It should be worth the effort.
Doremus
I know the pain of a photo that can’t be saved easily but which must be printed.
You did the right thing but maybe need to do a little more dodging. Dodge more if you can do it without causing a halo.
If you make the area a little lighter than surrounding you can carefully spot it down. Step back and look as you go until it blends at a distance.
I didn't know this was a possibility! In looking at photo chemicals on the website I use, there's no bleach listed. What do you use for this? I assume you're not talking about household bleach...
Thank you!
No, use potassium ferracyanide diluted with a cotton ball and lots of water to rinse as soon as it is light enough.
Thanks!No, use potassium ferracyanide diluted with a cotton ball and lots of water to rinse as soon as it is light enough.
Good to have an alternative that allows for a do-over. Thanks!Or you can use the re-halogenating bleach that is one of the two parts of a commercially packaged Sepia Toner, and then re-fix the print before the wash.
That gives you the option to reverse the bleaching by re-developing - you can start over.
Daniela, bleach = potassium ferricyanide. I'm not sure using bleach is an easy solution....except for trying to salvage the print you have. It sounds to me as if you've been the victim of dry down. If you're reprinting (& kept track of your previous time) make it still lighter (Maybe make some dodging test strips of the area and dry them in a microwave or with a hairdryer) Bleaching is also hit & miss.....because if you wait until it looks just right...by the time you rinse it...it may have bleached too far. Check out the tips here gleaned from Bruce Barnbaum.
It's a beautiful image, it may just take a while to get it the way you want it.....
Or you can use the re-halogenating bleach that is one of the two parts of a commercially packaged Sepia Toner, and then re-fix the print before the wash.
That gives you the option to reverse the bleaching by re-developing - you can start over.
Thank you! I have some potassium ferricyanide from a cyanotype kit, but I'll keep this in mind for the future.Something like this should be available:
Moersch Photochemie Bleach Concentrate
View attachment 340042
Got it. Thanks!I would scan the negative and see if there’s the details you’re seeking. If it’s there you have a chance. I would add that you can add some fixer to the potassium ferricyanide that was called Farmers Reducer Best to go slow when bleaching. If you can get the results you are looking for by dodging that’s how I would go but learning to bleach might be worthwhile.
I tried cropping and I didn't like the results at all. I'll give the glare a burn and see what happens. For what it's worth, it's much more subtle on the print than on the scan. Thanks!I reckon the picture is more than good enough to simply crop the "wrong" bit out and call the rest a tall vertical composition. And then burn in the specular reflection in the water so it shows rivers of tone instead of glare.
Another reversible approach would be to place a material like ground glass or scotch tape (the frosted type) over the top of your negative carrier and scribble on the relevant part with a graphite pencil. The pencil marks must be far enough from the negative so as to be out of focus when projected onto the paper.
This used to be common practice among pictorialists using glass plate negatives, and in my youth you could buy a matt varnish to give the glass surface some ‘tooth’ for the pencil. I never thought of using it with film until someone on this forum posted the idea. Having tried it, I can report that it’s not easy to get it right with small formats, but it can be done effectively. Practice would no doubt make perfect, but one hopes not to need it that often!
the Lootens reference is on archive. https://archive.org/details/lootensonphotogr00jghi/page/n10/mode/1up
View attachment 340237
ch.12 and 16 may help
also, after one good print, you could make a copy neg using Ilford Ortho+ . Was a common commercial lab mode when dealing with difficult negs.
Wonderful. Thanks!-- more to do with its tungsten response.
it can also be developed by inspection. develops easily in range of developers.
> see the datasheet: https://www.ilfordphoto.com/amfile/file/download/file/1948/product/1658/
for range of devs.
> it also makes a great masking film for bw films.
Will be there next Monday and hopefully have a success story to report!Daniela, I'll be interested to see the product of your next darkroom session with this negative.
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?