Handcrafted Silver Gelatin

[dwross2]

I finally, really, get it. I haven't had so much fun with a camera for years. Did you know that a camera can be handheld? Amazing. And that if you're around other people they don't all stop and ask what you're doing? (Actually, I might have to take out a view camera a couple of times a year just to strike up conversations with strangers. I think I could miss that part ) But I still haven't decided if it's a blessing or a curse that I have about 10 times the images to evaluate than I have ever gotten on the best of film shoots. At least it's a happy conundrum.

Denise, I'm wondering how important it is to you to achieve a precisely accurate color reproduction.

Words of wisdom and I wholeheartedly agree. I don't have a firm idea in my head about what I want my gum-overs to look like. If I close my eyes, I see old varnish on oil or soot-softened frescos. For me, trying to match the colors as closely as possible, as I'm learning, gives me a benchmark to fully understand the materials and processes. Who knows where it can go from there? I do know that I want to keep the spirit of the fun and adventure of art that I feel right now. I think I'll call my gum-over prints the "Gummy Bare Gallery". Ok, ok, maybe just a bit goofy? It must be sunstroke.

Best to all,
d

 

[dwross2]

Hi All:

I've posted my week's efforts on my website.

http://dwrphotos.com/blog/Section11/AddingColor.htm#Current


I'm going to try to post once a week on Friday evening. I'm hoping that by the first of the year the website will have enough information on it that anyone who so desires can get started on silver gelatin emulsion making. Until then, feel free to offer advice, critique and commentary (the spellcheck kind is especially appreciated).

I hope everyone has a great weekend.
d

 

[Katharine Thayer]

Lookin' Good!

What fun, Denise, and look how that green brightened up without replacing the red after all. I actually like the green in your print better than the green in the original; I really dislike that easter-basket-grass green that some commercial color processes give. I've got no advice for you but keep following your own path. This is so much fun!
kt

 

[Katharine Thayer]

Well, you know me; I can't ever let myself have the last word. After looking the whole page over more carefully this morning, I have a couple of further questions and comments:

1. On my first very fast scan through, I mistakenly thought you were using the same reds as before, including the PR 170. Now I see that you did take the PR 170 out, which makes me feel better about fingering it as a possible cause of the dull color mixes you were getting before, in addition to maybe too much pthalo.

2. My speculation that the printing inks might be providing some adhesion and that a straight gum and watercolor layer might not stick as well to the gelatin silver emulsion was obviously unfounded, since you didn't seem to have any problem with the red layer.

3. I'm confused about the amount of blue you're using compared to the last round and compared to the other colors. It looks like you're using 8x as much blue (2.5 g + 1.5 g) as yellow or red (.5 g each) in one set of printings. Is that the case, or is it a typo? By the way, the violet really toned down the pthalo nicely; that was a good idea.

4. I really appreciate the step by step demos you show, including the ones that didn't work out so well; those offer sometimes as much information than the ones that did. Your first set of pictures for yesterday vs the second provides some (weak) support for a suspicion I've long held about gumovers, that the other process provides the structure of the image, and the gum only adds a little color; in other words gumovers are a very different animal from a straight gum print. I'm not saying anyone's ever suggested otherwise, it's just that I've never been sure in my own mind how much a gumover contributes to the actual image vs acting like toning or handcoloring to simply add color.

I don't know if this will get more people to do their own gel silver emulsions, but I can imagine that platinum gumovers may start to include more color after this.

5. I'm curious why you added PhotoFlo. I would think that with the very low pigment/gum ratios you're using, and with the coast climate, you wouldn't have any problem brushing out the gum before it started setting up, so maybe it's got something to do with coating over the gel silver emulsion.

Just some thoughts for whatever they're worth...as I said, you're doing great.

Katharine

 

[dwross2]

Thank you Katherine!

It's very comforting to know someone is watching your back. That's what I love about collaborative research (and friends).

I was rushing to press last night so I could get started packing for a dawn canoe trip. (mea culpa: I have to set silly little goals for myself or I can be the most atrocious procrastinator.) That's also the reason the conclusion section is so weak. I'll beef it up and fix the typos after I finish this.

re:1) Ooohh yeah. It took me about three seconds to decide to take your very good advice about ditching the permanent red. Such an unpleasant shade of red. I liked the green leaves after the second yellow layer, but I really had to risk another red layer, so I dodged the leaves during the second red printing. Burning and dodging is one of my favorite parts of printing. I love making elaborate customized tools out of Cheerios boxes. This wasn't anything so fancy. The printing time ran 5 minutes, so it would be almost impossible to get a hard edge. The red on the leaves washed off in the first developer bath. After the fourth bath, I noticed there was a little red in the corner that I didn't like, so I carefully brushed it off with a small watercolor brush. I read somewhere that you can remove big swaths of emulsion while it's wet. I believe it, but I can't imagine being bold enough. I hardly like to breath on it before it dries. That's what I meant in the conclusion section about getting more sophisticated with the negatives. They should be able to be made so that they essentially do the job of a Cheerio box tool. (I'm such an optimist about technology -or at least my ability to manipulate it).

re:2) The inks do stick much better than the watercolors but I don't think it's necessary or worth the effort. In their favor is their cost. Cheap, cheap. But what a mess. They are almost impossible to get out of the brushes and the stuff travels. It's very viscous and hard to get out of the tubes in small amounts. Having said that, I think I'll stick with the inks for the blue layer.

re:3) You're right, of course. I was following my notes in a fairly braindead state. I used 0.4 g with 10 ml each of gum and sensitizer. I initially measured out 2.5 g blue and 1.5 g violet and mixed them together, then took out the smaller amount with a couple of toothpicks. I wasn't confident I could be sure of the proportions with too small a measurement. I have the blue/violet mix in a small, covered jar for next time. Easier that way.

re:4) Yes, I think the k-layer is important if you're after a print with something like a full density range. It's a complicated little happy dance, though. The colors do (theoretically) combine to make a dark color, so the k base has to be just a tad lighter than you might think. That 'tad' is the trick, of course, and I couldn't pretend to have it figured out yet.

I'm going to work very hard at convincing people that making b&w paper isn't that hard. I've tried baking some fancy desserts that were a lot more intimidating. Could I make Wonderbread at home? Probably not. But why would I want to, when a loaf of crunchy-crusted sourdough is so much more satisfying. We'll just have to leave the Wonderbread to Kodak.

re:5) I use Photoflo 600 in my emulsion recipe and I have feeling for it like salt in soup. The 600 is not the standard Photoflo (200, I think). It's a commercial product and a much stronger surfactant. The first time I coated, the pigment mixture seemed streak, so I added a couple of drops of 600. I think now that I might not have been soaking my brush and then squeezing out the excess as well as I could have, but the 600 certainly isn't hurting, so I'll leave it in (for now, at least). PF 600 is the same chemical, although a little more dilute, as Daniel Smith Acrylic Flow Releaser (Octyl Phenoxy Polyethoxy Ethanol).

If you can think of anything else, please let me know. Your help is greatly appreciated.
Denise

 

[Katharine Thayer]

Denise, thanks for the tip about the Daniel Smith Acrylic Flow Releaser; I'm pretty sure I've got some of that down in my painting studio, and I'll give it a try with an especially stiff mix I was experimenting with the other day. I would never have thought of using Photo Flo; it just shows what great new ideas a fresh mind can bring to the process.

I've used the Daniel Smith water-soluble ink, not in gum printing but in making a cliche-verre negative, and I found the stuff just incredibly sticky. It seemed like it took about six weeks before negative lost its tackiness. That's why I thought it might provide some stick-em to the mix. But I can believe that it's hard to wash out of brushes, even if it is water-soluble.

Yes, it's easy to wipe the gum off a finished print while it's still wet. I've ruined a print by having a floppily turned-up sleeve unroll at the wrong moment and fall onto the print, or by accidentally bumping the print with the end of the hair dryer.

Carry on...
kt

 

[dwross2]

Hi All:

For those of you who might not be following APUG threads, Kevin Klein has posted a couple of beautiful prints made from homemade emulsion coated glass plates.

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

 

[dwross2]

This week's swing at re-invention.

http://dwrphotos.com/blog/Section10/IHeart.htm#Current

A great weekend to one and all,
Denise

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

Great stuff, Denise! I like "Summer Storm" and the bread baking analogy.

I like the diptychs, but out of curiosity, if you are scanning 6x17 in two sections to make digital negs, why not stitch them?

 

[Katharine Thayer]

This is great work, Denise. The fairy dust must really be microscopic, because it's not evident in the scans anywhere.

I've often made an analogy between gum printing and baking bread, similar but not identical to your analogy. My analogy is between the working methods of the master gum printer and the master baker; neither of them slavishly follow a recipe, but the bread always turns out good. To me printing gum is more intuitive than exact. If the bread baker used the same amount of flour on a dry day as he did on a damp day, for example, the dough would turn out either too moist or too dry or both. So he intuitively uses the right amount of flour and liquid to make the dough feel right as he's kneading it. To me, gum printing is like that.

 

[dwross2]

Thank you, David and Katherine. The kind words are greatly appreciated.

David: There are a couple of reasons I haven't made stitched prints yet. I just graduated from PS7 to CS2 with its built-in stitcher, but also I've been scanning the 120 film at 4000ppi. Each half alone is over 800MB and that's about as big as my computer can handle. I'm guessing now that's overkill. The negatives I make from a Pentax K10 are only 720ppi and they seem fine. At this point I've put so much effort into a workflow that fits all my materials reliably I probably won't change again until I've run through all the variable permutations for my emulsion. Also, I will need to coat longer strips of paper to fit a one-piece panorama, and I'll have to build a bigger coating table to do that. It's on my agenda.

Katherine: From what I know so far about gum printing, I'd agree that the bread making analogy fits perfectly. The emulsion making part of the process is a little more rigid, although anything that is handmade will have a life and personality of its own. I've wondered how dependent I am on the fairly stable weather conditions here. The temperature varies little and the air is always humid and salty. I need to go to Sante Fe and see how that affects my procedure.

re: microscopic peppering: I added a section to my current entry (between the text and the diptych how-to). Maybe the pepper had something to do with the Azo 'magic'. Right now, I'm busting with so many questions I don't know where to start. Fun!

http://dwrphotos.com/blog/Section10/IHeart.htm#Current

 

[dwross2]

Hi All:

I've spent the last couple of weeks organizing a research schedule for emulsions and thinking about hybrid photography and its namesake website. My thoughts have come together just as Sean has added some really exciting new features, especially the Articles section. I am among the hybrid members who don't think of themselves as default APUG members, so the new features do seem exciting and not a redundant overlap with APUG.

Because I can't think of a better place for anyone trying to learn any aspect of photography to get solid, honest information, I have linked the current entry at my emulsion blog to hybridphoto. I'm confident that about any question or comment can be addessed by someone here.

I have high hopes that over the coming months an article about emulsion making will almost write itself, and the authors can be the "The Members of Hybridphoto."

http://dwrphotos.com/blog/Section12/GummyThumbs.htm#Current

Denise

 

[dwross2]

Hi All:

I have to guess that the gumovers are the main attraction in this thread, so I'm posting some new gum stuff in the "Color Gum Bichromate" thread in the Calibration forum. I haven't posted the info in my emulsion blog yet. I'm getting such a pile of research accumulated that I'm going to have to figure out how to edit and organize it. Right now I'm thinking the task will actually be easier when I have another month's worth of results so I can see a bigger, more unified picture.

For what it's worth.
Denise

 

[Bruce]

Digital Negative Question For Gum Bichromate

Denise

I read your blog information (good info) and have a question concerning your digital negative process for use with Gum Bichromate. I realize this post may be better in the Digital Negative portion of the Alt Photo list, but I thought I would post it here.

When you make your RGB negatives, are you applying a different curve to each of the 3 RGB negatives? I have read that some people apply a curve for each negative dependent on the color pigment they will use. I cant seem to figure out how they determine what the curve should look like. Any help would be appreciated.


Bruce

 

[dwross2]

Hello Bruce

Your exact question is what I'm working on right now. I think the answer will be both simpler and more complex than 'applying curves' - in other words, a different strategy/work flow.

For my first set (the last one on my website) I got too clever for my own good. I ended up with a good set, but I think it was more by accident and didn't give me enough information to ask the next questions. On those negatives, I saturated each color according to the separation. Blue and cyan, red and magenta, and yellow. For the set that I posted in the Gallery, I adjusted the original full color file and then made straight, unadjusted separations. The colors in the Pentax were from the factory default settings, normal exposure, and then in Camera Raw, I took the contrast way down and the saturation up just under the point where the colors looked cartoonish (I have the exact numbers in my notes, but since I'm not "there" yet, they wouldn't be of much use to you.)

A note here: I think that every factor in gum printing needs to be treated as an independent variable. The mechanics of gum printing itself couldn't be easier and the finessing of the details could hardly be more complex. That's why it is probably correct to say truthfully that gum can be learned in a day, but perfected over a decade. Quite marvelous. Who could ask for more from art? Who would want less?

An important variable is the substrate. It turns out that silver gelatin on Fabriano Artistico paper is as perfect as I could ask for. It holds on to the coatings but seems impossible to stain. Because of this, my work flow might not work for other substrates. I can over-expose and then selectively remove color after full development. That's a lot of fun, so I don't see any reason for me to try too hard to work that out of my strategy. Someone else might feel different.

What is needed and what I'm hoping for is a procedure that let's a gum printer work through a flow chart (as short a flow chart as possible!) to make the changes necessary to adjust for his/her own personal variables - especially the choice of pigments. For example, I suspect a "blue" negative will be different depending on the precise blue chosen and on the reds and yellows being combined with it.

Although at this point I can't imagine that there will ever be a one size-fits-all "Gum Curve", I can imagine a simple testing procedure that takes gum beyond pure luck and intuition and puts fine control in our hands.

Right now, I can only suggest that you follow really good, consistent work habits and take notes, notes and more notes. Here's my guess: when we know how we like to work and what we want our art to look like, it will be a fairly straightforward matter to apply a few firm facts to our procedures (most importantly, the negatives) to achieve something resembling artistic control.

The very best of luck and fun. Keep us posted.
Denise

 

[Bruce]

Denise

Thanks for the response. Good luck on your efforts.

As I expected, there is more to this than I first thought. I wish Christina Anderson or others would chime in on the converstaion to let us all know how they are determining the "curves" used for their digital negatives used for gum bichromate. As I recall, in Christina Anderson's book "Alternative Processes Condensed" she indicated that she was creating individual curves for each of the RBG negatives. Thus, a curve for her blue (cyan) pigment negative, another curve for her yellow pigment negative and a third curve for her magenta pigment negative. Now-- how are these curves determined? That is my question.

Bruce

 

[donbga]

Denise

Thanks for the response. Good luck on your efforts.

As I expected, there is more to this than I first thought. I wish Christina Anderson or others would chime in on the converstaion to let us all know how they are determining the "curves" used for their digital negatives used for gum bichromate. As I recall, in Christina Anderson's book "Alternative Processes Condensed" she indicated that she was creating individual curves for each of the RBG negatives. Thus, a curve for her blue (cyan) pigment negative, another curve for her yellow pigment negative and a third curve for her magenta pigment negative. Now-- how are these curves determined? That is my question.

Bruce

Hi Bruce,

Chris doesn't hang out here on HybridPhoto. Due to the demands on her time as a Professor of Photography at Montana State University she only reads and posts messages on the Alternative Process Mail List. You can also contact her through her website at
CZAphotography.com .

But to answer your question more directly Chris uses Mark Nelson's Precision Digital Negative software and method for creating digital negatives from inkjet printers.

Her method is to create a separate process adjustment curve for each color for her CMY (RGB) separations generated in Photoshop. Using this approach will create pretty accurate colors though because she generally uses traditional cyanotype as her first layer not all colors can be reproduced faithfully - the color gamut is limited because of this. Though I don't think she really is concerned about that.

There is also a lot of misunderstanding by some about her tri-color method; some people believe that her method is a rote methodology with little interpretive technique or gesture. This simply isn't correct.

Additionally I might add that you can print multi-layer gum or tri-color gum using a single generic curve but this usually requires a bit of fudging rather than strictly printing by the numbers.

Hope this helps some,

Don Bryant

 

[Bruce]

Hi Don

Thanks for the input. Yes, I know tht Chris is VERY busy and cant be on all the sites.

Per your comments, I better understand how she is doing an adjustment curve for each RGB color. I must have misunderstoood her book because I had thought that if she was doing a 4 or 5 or 6 coat gum, then she would have a different curve for each pigment color but I can see where that would also require 4 to 6 different negatives - one for each pigment color and curve. That could get expensive depending on which digital negative material you were using.

I also know that you can use ther same negative and curve for multi coat gum bichromate prints.


Thanks for the advice.


Bruce

 

[donbga]

I believe what Chris is suggesting is that if she wants to add more layers to nuance the print then she will use the same negative but vary the amount of pigment and/or exposure time using the same pigment color that the the negative was made for.

In other words she calibrates for specific colors and then may add gum/pigment layers to acheive a desired effect, hence what I meant by not printing by rote.

My advice is to learn the basic methodolgy and depart from there as your whims dictate. Once you've printed with gum and digital negatives for a while you learn to print with your gut as well as the numbers. I think this is what confuses people sometimes about using a calibrated approach. This is similar in a way to what one might do printing gum over palladium with a digital negative.

An example of this approach can be seen here in this print of Chris's:

http://www.permadocument.be/images/imag2/Through_The_Glass_Darkly1.jpg, an additional cyanotype layer was added as the final layer.

You can of course e-mail here and just ask her.

Don

 

[dwross2]

Katharine (and any other Yummy Gummys, of course)

I've made an addition to my emulsion blog. The two images use the same pigment set that we've discussed before. I'm hoping to start on a new set of colors tomorrow. If you spot anything that reads particularly befuddled, please let me know.

http://dwrphotos.com/blog/Section12/GummyThumbs.htm

 

[Katharine Thayer]

Katharine (and any other Yummy Gummys, of course)

I've made an addition to my emulsion blog. The two images use the same pigment set that we've discussed before. I'm hoping to start on a new set of colors tomorrow. If you spot anything that reads particularly befuddled, please let me know.

http://dwrphotos.com/blog/Section12/GummyThumbs.htm

Looks good, Denise. I look forward to seeing your next pigment combination.
Katharine

 

[dwross2]

Thank you, Katharine. I've posted a new pigment set on my site. I changed out the blue and violet ink combo for French Ultramarine Blue watercolor and Quinacridone Rose for Q Red in the red layer. Getting closer.
d

 

[Katharine Thayer]

Thank you, Katharine. I've posted a new pigment set on my site. I changed out the blue and violet ink combo for French Ultramarine Blue watercolor and Quinacridone Rose for Q Red in the red layer. Getting closer.
d

Thanks, Denise, I enjoyed looking at those, and glad to see you're finding a way to phase out the inks, since they don't seem to be necessary for sticking the pigment to the emulsion and you don't find them pleasant to work with.

I wish I could see some of these "in the gum" so to speak; I'm fascinated especially with your description of the surface of the print, which sounds somewhat different from the surface of a gum print on sized paper. But I trust someday we'll meet in person, since we're not so far apart geographically, and I look forward to seeing with my own eyes.

A scanned image is always tricky for evaluating a print, so what I'm seeing may not be the best representation of the actual prints, but from my monitor, I prefer the Seal Rock Seep image using the first pigment set; it seems brighter and cleaner to me than the newer image, which has a duller, more somber look to me. I suspect that is probably more a function of printing the gelatin silver image deeper than of the change in the pigment set, which suggests that the darker, more somber look is what you had in mind, in which case my opinion should be given exactly zero weight, if not less than zero. :--)

As I may have said earlier in this thread, ultramarine has long been my favorite blue for landscapes; I like the greens it makes better than the greens pthalo makes. But I've never used PV19 (quinacridone rose) with ultramarine; for a redder blue like ultramarine, I prefer a more orangey red; I use the bluer PV19 with a greener blue like pthalo, for balance. But these differences are somewhat subtle, and this is the wonderful thing about choosing a pigment palette: there are no wrong answers (with the exception of pigments with reflectance curves that give muddy mixtures, but all the ones you've picked here are good mixers). I'm a little surprised the PV19 doesn't seem to be holding its own with the ultramarine and especially with the yellow, since it's not a weak pigment as reds go. Are you happy with the color balance and the proportions you've got here?

As always, I'm amazed with how fast you've been able to print gum successfully and even fairly reliably, and what a great and innovative use you're making of it; my comments shouldn't be taken as criticisms of anything you're doing, but just more information for whatever it's worth to you. Feel free to discard if not useful; you're doing fine on your own. Carry on,
Katharine

 

[dwross2]

Katharine:
As always, thank you for the encouragement, support, and good advice. The feedback means a lot to me.

I wish I could see some of these "in the gum" so to speak; I'm fascinated especially with your description of the surface of the print, which sounds somewhat different from the surface of a gum print on sized paper. But I trust someday we'll meet in person, since we're not so far apart geographically, and I look forward to seeing with my own eyes.

I am planning a presentation of emulsion making and gummies in Portland soon after the first of the year. The details aren't worked out yet, but I'll let you know as soon as I know if our paths haven't crossed by then.

d

 

[jag2x]

Yello all,

Denise I just stumbled on this thread, you are a total inspiration for all us wannabe hybrids! Your website is very detailed and informative.
I see your doing Gum over your home made Silver emulsion, very intresting. You also have Katherine to help you, shes a true Gum artist.
I myself have just started the baby steps of Gum printing, and infact just last night I got flaking of pigment. I first thought it was one of gums infinite variables that stuffed me up...then sat down this morning and figured it was just that, flaking!
I've only quickly looked at your Emulsion making on your website, is there recipes for it?
Keep up the good work and your hand coloured prints are amazing!

Cheers
Jacek
www.jagnight.com