Kallitype papers

[philsweeney]

I am using stonehenge rising for kallitypes. Following all the steps in Sandy's article, I am am getting good results with tonal balance and contrast, but the coating is not smooth. It almost appears like the coating is not on the surface and the character of the paper is more predominant than the image on the coating. And therefore the image is not sharp. I have tried extra coating solution with no improvement. Should I just try another paper?

 

[fhovie]

Try aubumum if you want sharp.

 

[philsweeney]

you will have to tell me what "aubumum" is!

 

[Deckled Edge]

I'm dyin' to know what it is.
Paper matters a great deal. Try several.

 

[fhovie]

I spelled it wrong-
Albumen printing:

http://www.redhillphoto.com/albumen.html

try that.

 

[Joe Lipka]

Sometimes the watercolor type papers have a smooth side and a textured side. Try some prints on the "other" side of the paper and see if that solves the problem.

 

[Aggie]

..

 

[Deckled Edge]

What sort of contact print frame are you using? Holding the negative tight against the paper is key. The weight of a big piece of glass may be insufficient. I like my 8x10 prints better when made on my spring-closed contact frame. The one with the hinge on one end and thick glass gives fuzzy images. I use Rising Stonehenge and the find the surface wonderful. I haven't yet used Arches Platine for kallitypes but you might like that surface better. Also the color of the print is affected by the paper.
PS I learned the hard way to get a properly sized paper. Arches 88 feels like heaven but sucks coating solution like dry sand!

 

[philsweeney]

I am using a vacuum frame. I got some nice results on clearprint 1020 this weekend. Used some crane's platinotype also, but I liked the clearprint better.

 

[philsweeney]

For most of my kallitype printing I have tailored the negative so I can use 4ml pot dichromate in the sodium citrate. So the negative needs to be about 1.5 log. Is there any good reason to consider tailoring my negatives for using 1ml dichromate, which will require a negative log of 1.75 - 1.8?

 

[donbga]

For most of my kallitype printing I have tailored the negative so I can use 4ml pot dichromate in the sodium citrate. So the negative needs to be about 1.5 log. Is there any good reason to consider tailoring my negatives for using 1ml dichromate, which will require a negative log of 1.75 - 1.8?

Why use potassium dichromate at all if you are attempting to build a negative with a DR to match the process?

As for even coating of the paper, what paper are you using and how are you coating it? Also what is the relative humidity of your coating environment?

A textured paper surface requires more sensitizer than hot press paper.

One thing that may help with even coating is to add a couple of drops of grain alcohol to the sensitizer for an 8x10 size print.

Good luck,

Don Bryant

 

[Stan. L-B]

Phil.
Have you tried Fabrino 140lb water colour paper?

And, I note you are using dichromate and sodium citrate for your Ks. where the normal chemistry for Ks here is, ferric oxalate with silver nitrate. I have no experience of your formula. As with all these processes, a slight change of the formula used, gives different tone.

 

[sanking]

Phil.
Have you tried Fabrino 140lb water colour paper?

And, I note you are using dichromate and sodium citrate for your Ks. where the normal chemistry for Ks here is, ferric oxalate with silver nitrate. I have no experience of your formula. As with all these processes, a slight change of the formula used, gives different tone.

Stan,

The normal chemistry for the kallitype sensitizer on this side of the pond is also ferric oxalate and silver nitrate, more specifically a 1:1 mixture of a 20% solution of ferric oxalate with a 10% solution of silver nitrate.

What Phil and Don are talking about is adding small amount of potassium dichromate to the developer, in this case sodium citrate, to control contrast. When you use sodium citrate as the developer it is possible to adjust the amount of dichromate in the developer from virtually none to as much a about 16ml of a 5% solution per liter of developer to match negatives with DRs that range from about 1.3 to as much as 2.0 or slightly higher.

As for the Fabriano water color papers none of these have worked well for me in recent years with kallitype. Both artistico and uno give prints of rather low Dmax. Dmax can be increased slightly with an oxalic acid soak of the Fabriano papers but it remains unacceptably low in my estimation even with this procedure.

There are a number of other developers that one can use with kallitype, including potassium oxalate which is my second choice behind sodium citrate. Assuming that you will tone your kallitypes, as one surely should if permanence is of any concern, the choice of developer is not very important since the final image will take on the tone of the toning metal, regardless of which developer you use.

Sandy King

 

[philsweeney]

Why use potassium dichromate at all if you are attempting to build a negative with a DR to match the process?
Don Bryant

Don, I thought using some dichromate would put me in the middle so if I needed less contrast I could reduce the dichromate and increase for more contrast. Plus I can reduce neg. developing time a little. My question is to try and realize if there are qualities of a print that are more desirable if I used less or no dichromate?

Papers I like so far are socorro and strathmore 400 watercolor. I have no problem coating these. I do need an oxalic acid soak for both.

 

[donbga]

Hi Phil,

I thought that might be your rationale, personally I prefer to avoid dichromate usage when ever possible. If you use dichromate how do you replenish the developer?

I've been using Bergger Cot 320 and have been very happy with it (except the price). I've just order some Stonehenge Rising and Lenox to work with (much cheaper too).

Don

 

[philsweeney]

I replenish per sandy king's article on kallitypes. I keep a second bottle with the appropriate amount of dichromate in it for topping off.

I want to try the cot-320. Does it need an oxalic acid bath for kallitype? Unfortunately I had no luck with the stonehenge rising, maybe I got a funky batch? I also had no luck with the artistico. Crane's platinotype is OK with no oxalic acid but I find the paper too delicate and I have to handle it very gently.

 

[mikepry]

I too, have just tried the Cott 320 and it is magnificent. It is the nicest paper I have worked with. Luxuriant comes to mind. I don't use oxalic acid with it. I balked at the price at first but then when it comes right down to it when you think of all the work one goes through to get to the point when you actually make a print.....it really isn't that much more. The results negated any qualms I had about price.

 

[donbga]

I replenish per sandy king's article on kallitypes. I keep a second bottle with the appropriate amount of dichromate in it for topping off.

I want to try the cot-320. Does it need an oxalic acid bath for kallitype? Unfortunately I had no luck with the stonehenge rising, maybe I got a funky batch? I also had no luck with the artistico. Crane's platinotype is OK with no oxalic acid but I find the paper too delicate and I have to handle it very gently.

So if you wanted to print negatives with different DR you would have to maintain 2 bottles for each dilution, which seems very tedious.

The COT 320 doesn't require any pre-treatment. I've used it with several different processes (VDB, cyanotype, palladium/platinum DOP, and ziatypes) with good results. It does have signifigant dry down.

What kind of problem did you have with Stonehenge? I've also got some Lenox ordered, it would be nice to have a good inexpensive paper.

Platinotype is an okay paper but it does tend to tear when handling large wet sheets.

Don

 

[donbga]

COT 320

I too, have just tried the Cott 320 and it is magnificent. It is the nicest paper I have worked with. Luxuriant comes to mind. I don't use oxalic acid with it. I balked at the price at first but then when it comes right down to it when you think of all the work one goes through to get to the point when you actually make a print.....it really isn't that much more. The results negated any qualms I had about price.

Art Craft Chemicals seems to have the best price for COT 320 but only slightly less than Bostick & Sullivan.

FWIW, Bergger makes one of the best inkjet papers for quad tone printing I've ever used, but it is *REALLY* expensive.

Don

 

[philsweeney]

What kind of problem did you have with Stonehenge? I've also got some Lenox ordered, it would be nice to have a good inexpensive paper.
Don

The stonehenge I received sucked up the coating too much and image density was poor.

 

[Jeremy]

For palladium the Stonhenge needs to be dunked in oxalic acid first and then it provides a wonderful print with a very deep black (for me). If you have some stonehenge left over try soaking it in oxalic acid first--coating also seems easier to me when the humidity isn't too low.

 

[philsweeney]

As best as I can recall I tried an oxalic acid bath on stonehenge also. For Kallitype I have found if the paper is bibulous the oxalic acid does not change that. I do have humidity problems in the winter but I started to humidify the room when the humidity gets low.

 

[sanking]

So if you wanted to print negatives with different DR you would have to maintain 2 bottles for each dilution, which seems very tedious.

Don

Well, the fact is I maintain about 5-7 bottles for contrast control, ranging from as little as no potassium dichromate added to the developer to as much as 16-24 ml of a 4% potassium dichromate per liter of developer. It is really not so tedious as all, you just need to have space for the bottles, and the developer lasts indefinitely.

Sandy

 

[sanking]

As best as I can recall I tried an oxalic acid bath on stonehenge also. For Kallitype I have found if the paper is bibulous the oxalic acid does not change that. I do have humidity problems in the winter but I started to humidify the room when the humidity gets low.

What is bibulous paper? And is it easy to recognize?

Sandy

 

[sanking]

Well, the fact is I maintain about 5-7 bottles for contrast control, ranging from as little as no potassium dichromate added to the developer to as much as 16-24 ml of a 4% potassium dichromate per liter of developer. It is really not so tedious as all, you just need to have space for the bottles, and the developer lasts indefinitely.

Sandy

To clairfy, I keep one large bottle of fresh sodium citrate, with no potassium dichromate, and from this I replenish the other bottles as needed. For example, if I make an 8X10 print with the developer that has 1ml of the 4% potassium dichromate solution, I replenish the develper with 100ml of the fresh sodium citrate solution, and then add 2 drops (where 20 drops = one ml) of the 4% potassium dichromate solution. If I make a print of the same size with the developer that contains 4ml of the 4% potassium dichromate solution per liter, then I replenish adding 100 ml of fresh sodium citrate solution, to which I then add 8 drops of the 4% potassium dichroamte solution.

This replenishment system may sound complicated but in fact once you start using it to make print you will find that is really quite simple. pie.