I'm not sure if this is a common misunderstanding or if it is just my misunderstanding.
But there sure is a lot of contradictory information about toning in the "alt process" world, so maybe this is part of it.
About a year ago I spent a lot of time playing around with different combinations of gold toners on salt prints. Mostly I used about 65ml of liquid per print, and early on I verified that it does not make much difference how dilute the toner is: if it is more dilute you can achieve nearly identical results and it just takes a little longer. I should have thought about what this means much more carefully.
Then I went on, using about 65ml toner in every test, varying the paper and amount of gelatin and exposure, and then the concentration and order of gold borax and gold thiocyanate toners. I printed the same negative over and over again and by looking at the results side by side it is easy to see the differences in varying different factors.
BUT I was thinking of the toning changes as being related to the concentration of the toners! That's not true and if I'd thought more carefully I should have realized it! It's the total amount of gold in the toner that matters!
Here's an interesting chapter in a 1910 book that describes it very well. My experience matches this description perfectly.
This all became clear to me on Sunday, when I thought I needed 30% more liquid to tone a print, so I kept the concentration the same and added about 30% more gold chloride and borax... the result was very neutral and not the sort of subtle "burnt rose" color I was hoping for...
So if you are keeping notes about toning, pay attention to how much silver is on the print you want to tone, and how much gold altogether you put in your toner!
But there sure is a lot of contradictory information about toning in the "alt process" world, so maybe this is part of it.
About a year ago I spent a lot of time playing around with different combinations of gold toners on salt prints. Mostly I used about 65ml of liquid per print, and early on I verified that it does not make much difference how dilute the toner is: if it is more dilute you can achieve nearly identical results and it just takes a little longer. I should have thought about what this means much more carefully.
Then I went on, using about 65ml toner in every test, varying the paper and amount of gelatin and exposure, and then the concentration and order of gold borax and gold thiocyanate toners. I printed the same negative over and over again and by looking at the results side by side it is easy to see the differences in varying different factors.
BUT I was thinking of the toning changes as being related to the concentration of the toners! That's not true and if I'd thought more carefully I should have realized it! It's the total amount of gold in the toner that matters!
Here's an interesting chapter in a 1910 book that describes it very well. My experience matches this description perfectly.
This all became clear to me on Sunday, when I thought I needed 30% more liquid to tone a print, so I kept the concentration the same and added about 30% more gold chloride and borax... the result was very neutral and not the sort of subtle "burnt rose" color I was hoping for...
So if you are keeping notes about toning, pay attention to how much silver is on the print you want to tone, and how much gold altogether you put in your toner!
Last edited by a moderator:
