Glass plate negative questions

Leaving Kefalonia

H
Leaving Kefalonia

  • 0
  • 0
  • 49
Lightning Strike

A
Lightning Strike

  • 1
  • 2
  • 67
Scales / jommuhtree

D
Scales / jommuhtree

  • 1
  • 2
  • 46
3 Columns

A
3 Columns

  • 7
  • 7
  • 201

Recent Classifieds

Forum statistics

Threads
199,068
Messages
2,785,773
Members
99,794
Latest member
SEADave
Recent bookmarks
0

BetterSense

Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2008
Messages
3,151
Location
North Caroli
Format
35mm
I went to an art exhibit this weekend where they had many digital prints made from what they said were original glass plate negatives shot during the 1930 discovery/robbing of King Tut's tomb. I don't know anything about glass plate negatives, but I had assumed that into the 1930s, they would be using nitro film. During what time period was silver-gelatin-on-glass in widespread use for commercial photography? When did film start to take over? I imagine that glass negatives can be printed just like film negatives, probably even easier because they are flat. But are there any other differences in technique compared to film? I suppose you need a special camera for glass as opposed to film negatives.
 

Ian Grant

Subscriber
Joined
Aug 2, 2004
Messages
23,271
Location
West Midland
Format
Multi Format
Glass plates were still in use in the 50's & 60's. Looking in 1930's publications all the manufacturers offered a wide range of plates while film tended to be mainly limited to smaller sizes.

It's probably the invention of Safety film and the wide scale adoption of the International darkslides that heralded the switch from plates to film. If you look at early negative the nitrate film is not as sturdy as modern film base and would not have been suitable for larger sizes.

Ian
 
Joined
Dec 30, 2005
Messages
7,175
Location
Milton, DE USA
Format
Analog
Wirelessly posted (BlackBerry9000/4.6.0.167 Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 VendorID/102 UP.Link/6.3.0.0.0)

And you didn't need a different camera, per se, only a ground glass assembly that accepted glass plate holders. Here I am talking past tense. There are many who still pour and shoot glass plates. Our mag just had a special issue a couple of months ago on the subject.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

dwross

Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2004
Messages
1,263
Location
Oregon Coast
Format
Multi Format
I went to an art exhibit this weekend where they had many digital prints made from what they said were original glass plate negatives shot during the 1930 discovery/robbing of King Tut's tomb. I don't know anything about glass plate negatives, but I had assumed that into the 1930s, they would be using nitro film. During what time period was silver-gelatin-on-glass in widespread use for commercial photography? When did film start to take over? I imagine that glass negatives can be printed just like film negatives, probably even easier because they are flat. But are there any other differences in technique compared to film? I suppose you need a special camera for glass as opposed to film negatives.

The glass negatives that Burton used were gelatin dry plate negatives. 'Glass negative' can also refer to wet plate collodion negatives (I believe Chris is referring to these when he says there are many who still pour and shoot glass plates.) As opposed to collodion photography, you don't need much in the way of special equipment for gelatin dry plates. You will need a plate holder, but they are easily made from old wooden film holders.

Enlarging for printing is identical as with film negatives, with the flatness benefit you pointed out. My 4x5 plates fit perfectly in my 4x5 negative carrier. I run into trouble with 5x7 because my holder is a glass carrier a half inch larger in both dimensions. I have set a 5x7 plate on the glass like I would a negative and the glass cover sheet. Works fine except for perhaps just a hint of light bounce.

There's more info on dry plate photography here:
http://www.thelightfarm.com/Map/DryPlate/DryPlatePart1.htm

Hope you give it a try!
d
 

dpurdy

Member
Joined
Jun 24, 2006
Messages
2,674
Location
Portland OR
Format
8x10 Format
I printed a bunch of vintage 11x14 glass plate negs a while ago. Surprisingly a couple negs had flatness issues and I was unable to print them sharp, as I wasn't using a vacume. (however you spell vacume) I was just clamping the negs down to the paper on top of another piece of plate glass that I know is flat. I was unable to get a couple of the prints sharp in areas regardless of how much I clamped it, the glass was just too warped.

In Rolleiflex lore the camera was created when Kodak figured out how to put film on rolls but it wasn't good enough for a lot of photographers. So Rollei created a plate glass back as an accessory. If anyone cares.
 

removed account4

Subscriber
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
Messages
29,832
Format
Hybrid
tmax 100 dry plates were available commercially
until just a few years ago. they cost about 4x as much as
sheet film ...
 

dwross

Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2004
Messages
1,263
Location
Oregon Coast
Format
Multi Format
tmax 100 dry plates were available commercially
until just a few years ago. they cost about 4x as much as
sheet film ...

Luckily for us, today, we can make ULF plates for less cost than ULF film :smile:.

Dennis: I'm pretty sure you would have good luck contact printing your old plates if you used a contact printing frame. They really are necessary for sharp printing. A sheet of glass just doesn't have the weight required. It might work for a process where a bit of softness isn't a distraction, but not so much with gelatin papers (in my opinion, of course). The rub is that you need a frame that's exactly the size of your plate. The plate replaces the glass. The old contact printing frames did just that. All the modern frames seem to be an inch longer in both dimensions to meet modern printing habits ( i.e. a frame advertised as 11 x 14 is really 12 x 15). You can look for antique frames or you can make your own from a sturdy wooden picture frame, 1/2" plywood, thick felt, and metal straps for press-downs.

If anyone knows of a commercial source for new frames exactly the dimensions of the various standard plate formats, I love to hear about it.

Denise
 

dpurdy

Member
Joined
Jun 24, 2006
Messages
2,674
Location
Portland OR
Format
8x10 Format
Hi Denise, when I first started printing platinum I used a printing frame with the spring clips and just couldn't get good contact every where. I was stuffing sheets of foam or mat board or anything I could to force the film to stay in tight contact and just had bad luck. I switched to using 1/4" plate glass on top and bottom and clamps all along both sides and got much tighter contact with film and paper. I keep the glass sandwich close to the paper size. I really don't think there is a better way except with the vacuum.
Dennis
 

sanking

Member
Joined
Mar 26, 2003
Messages
5,437
Location
Greenville,
Format
Large Format
I have often wondered why more people appear attracted to wet plate collodion negatives than to making gelatin dry plate negatives. Is there some special image quality in the wet plate collodion negative, or is it just more difficult to get an even coating with dry plate negatives?

Sandy King





The glass negatives that Burton used were gelatin dry plate negatives. 'Glass negative' can also refer to wet plate collodion negatives (I believe Chris is referring to these when he says there are many who still pour and shoot glass plates.) As opposed to collodion photography, you don't need much in the way of special equipment for gelatin dry plates. You will need a plate holder, but they are easily made from old wooden film holders.
 

Loris Medici

Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2005
Messages
1,154
Location
Istanbul, Tu
Format
Multi Format
I'd prefer dry plate negatives to wet plate negatives each and every time in terms of ease -> even assuming pouring dry plate negatives are harder (I absolutely don't have a clue on this! But my feeling is that it shouldn't be any harder, both need mastery - gained w/ exercise...), just because the fact that with wet plate, you need a darkroom with you *in the field*... I'd rather learn how to pour well gelatin emulsion instead of carrying a darkroom with me!

OTOH, in my limited knowledge, theorically, wet plate negatives have the edge in the ultimate image detail department. There aren't silver halide crystals with pre-determined shape and size in wet plate, which is not the case for dry plate negatives. Does that have an importance in real life situations? Hardly... (My gut feeling again.)

I'm interested in dry plate (future plan) because I have a nice 5x7" plate camera with a fine / large aperture lens which I want to exploit.

Regards,
Loris.


I have often wondered why more people appear attracted to wet plate collodion negatives than to making gelatin dry plate negatives. Is there some special image quality in the wet plate collodion negative, or is it just more difficult to get an even coating with dry plate negatives?

Sandy King
 

dwross

Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2004
Messages
1,263
Location
Oregon Coast
Format
Multi Format
I have often wondered why more people appear attracted to wet plate collodion negatives than to making gelatin dry plate negatives. Is there some special image quality in the wet plate collodion negative, or is it just more difficult to get an even coating with dry plate negatives?

Sandy King

One of the reasons collodion has attracted modern practitioners is its original history. Due to the nature of the beast, wet plates could never be commercially produced - at least not the final product. Because photographers poured their own plates in the field for over twenty years, we know it can be done.

Gelatin dry plate, on the other hand, was the Holy Grail delivered to the 1880's photographic industry. Cameras and printing papers were already being commercially produced, now so could the negatives. The sales loop closed. Kodak especially sold a message along with its products - "modern photographic materials production is so complex only the experts can do it". It was marketing, pure and simple, but the message took root fast and deep. You can still hear it from Kodak and ex-Kodak people today. And, unfortunately, too many people still believe it.

By 1940, the photographic industry was infamous for its secrets. And, without a doubt, by that time they were making products that we'd have a hard-to-impossible time reproducing in our darkrooms. But, anyone can make the early emulsions. It is both safer and far easier than collodion (Although I have to admit, hauling your darkroom around in a covered wagon is pretty cool. Never want to do it, but I can see the attraction.)

Coating was one the first things to go mechanical. Because it's hard to get clean edges on plates, huge pieces of glass were coated. After the emulsion set up, the unevenly coated salvages were cut off and the big sheet was cut into smaller plates. It is possible to pour-coat with practice, but the emulsion will rarely be completely uniform. That's perfectly ok, if that's a look you want. I prefer my plates as nice as I can get them, so I borrow from the idea of the old coating machines, but rather than cut off the selvages after coating, I essentially do that before coating. Since a picture is worth a thousand words, here's a picture or two: http://thelightfarm.com/Map/DryPlate/PlatePrep/DryPlatePart4a.htm

Denise
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Don12x20

Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2006
Messages
249
Location
Pacific North
Format
Multi Format
tmax 100 dry plates were available commercially
until just a few years ago. they cost about 4x as much as
sheet film ...


These were often used in astronomy. Film surface perfectly flat, and no negative "popping" during long exposures.
 

sanking

Member
Joined
Mar 26, 2003
Messages
5,437
Location
Greenville,
Format
Large Format
Denise,

Thanks for the explanation. And you have some very interesting illustrations on your web site. Really fun to look at.


Sandy


One of the reasons collodion has attracted modern practitioners is its original history. Due to the nature of the beast, wet plates could never be commercially produced - at least not the final product. Because photographers poured their own plates in the field for over twenty years, we know it can be done.

Gelatin dry plate, on the other hand, was the Holy Grail delivered to the 1880's photographic industry. Cameras and printing papers were already being commercially produced, now so could the negatives. The sales loop closed. Kodak especially sold a message along with its products - "modern photographic materials production is so complex only the experts can do it". It was marketing, pure and simple, but the message took root fast and deep. You can still hear it from Kodak and ex-Kodak people today. And, unfortunately, too many people still believe it.

By 1940, the photographic industry was infamous for its secrets. And, without a doubt, by that time they were making products that we'd have a hard-to-impossible time reproducing in our darkrooms. But, anyone can make the early emulsions. It is both safer and far easier than collodion (Although I have to admit, hauling your darkroom around in a covered wagon is pretty cool. Never want to do it, but I can see the attraction.)

Coating was one the first things to go mechanical. Because it's hard to get clean edges on plates, huge pieces of glass were coated. After the emulsion set up, the unevenly coated salvages were cut off and the big sheet was cut into smaller plates. It is possible to pour-coat with practice, but the emulsion will rarely be completely uniform. That's perfectly ok, if that's a look you want. I prefer my plates as nice as I can get them, so I borrow from the idea of the old coating machines, but rather than cut off the selvages after coating, I essentially do that before coating. Since a picture is worth a thousand words, here's a picture or two: http://thelightfarm.com/Map/DryPlate/PlatePrep/DryPlatePart4a.htm

Denise
 

nawagi

Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2006
Messages
87
Location
Connecticut
Format
Large Format
Sandy-

For me it was the complexity of making gelatin dry plates. Between the noodle washing and cold flat stone, I decided that my collodion technique was far better than my (zero) gelatin experience. Collodion also permits me to intensify the negative in a couple of ways- I can leave it "soft" for modern silver gelatin paper printing, intensify "bullet-proof" with copper sulfate for salts or albumins, or iodine re-develop for VBD or c-types. I like those choices.

Gelatin glass plates are probably fleixible too - but they are the devil I don't know. And I apologize for not printing platinum. Your work is this area is just terrific and I look forward to learning this process in the next year.

NWG
 

dwross

Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2004
Messages
1,263
Location
Oregon Coast
Format
Multi Format
Denise,

Thanks for the explanation. And you have some very interesting illustrations on your web site. Really fun to look at.


Sandy

Thanks, Sandy. I really am having a lot of fun. I'm glad my website reflects that. I think all of us involved with the old techniques (and the newly old!) are having more fun than is probably seemly. (But, what the heck.)

Nawagi, I'm pretty sure you don't need a cold flat stone :surprised:.
 

sanking

Member
Joined
Mar 26, 2003
Messages
5,437
Location
Greenville,
Format
Large Format
Thanks, Sandy. I really am having a lot of fun. I'm glad my website reflects that. I think all of us involved with the old techniques (and the newly old!) are having more fun than is probably seemly. (But, what the heck.)

Nawagi, I'm pretty sure you don't need a cold flat stone :surprised:.

Denise,

How do you prep the glass surface for receiving the emulsion. I looked through your directions but must have missed that detail if it is there.

Sandy
 
Joined
Apr 18, 2005
Messages
818
Location
San Bernardi
Format
8x10 Format
Sandy,
Go back to Denise's Website(the light farm) and look under "Articles".
I have an article on glass preparation there. It has worked well for me. My final images are on glass. So permanent adhesion is a must.
Bill
 

sanking

Member
Joined
Mar 26, 2003
Messages
5,437
Location
Greenville,
Format
Large Format
Hi Bill,

Thanks. I will have a look.

Sandy


Sandy,
Go back to Denise's Website(the light farm) and look under "Articles".
I have an article on glass preparation there. It has worked well for me. My final images are on glass. So permanent adhesion is a must.
Bill
 
Joined
Apr 18, 2005
Messages
818
Location
San Bernardi
Format
8x10 Format
"I think all of us involved with the old techniques (and the newly old!) are having more fun than is probably seemly. (But, what the heck.) "

Some of us,on the other hand, just suffer from Obsessive/Compulsive Disorder and have No Life!
Bill:tongue:
 

dwross

Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2004
Messages
1,263
Location
Oregon Coast
Format
Multi Format
Bill,

Don't let them tell you that Photographic OCD isn't a perfectly valid lifestyle choice! (Anyone who implies that is obviously jealous :D)

d
 

Kirk Keyes

Member
Joined
Jun 17, 2004
Messages
3,234
Location
Portland, OR
Format
4x5 Format
I have often wondered why more people appear attracted to wet plate collodion negatives than to making gelatin dry plate negatives.

It's the ether - everybody loves the ether...
 
Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links.
To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here.

PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Ilford ADOX Freestyle Photographic Stearman Press Weldon Color Lab Blue Moon Camera & Machine
Top Bottom