Kodalith style film development/printing

[FL at CC]

Hey everyone, I'm very curious as to how one can achieve a near Kodalith result say like Nick Knight circa mid-80s or Helmut Newton. I've always been very intrigued as to how this result was done, though can't really pinpoint exactly the way it can be executed. Any ideas?

 

[Donald Qualls]

What I recall from high school photography class (around 1974-1975, when Kodalith was still a current poduct), there was a special "A B" two-part developer that would give the "all or nothing" contrast; if, instead, you processed in Dektol, you got something resembling an ordinary film negative or positive.

If you were making a mask based on highlights or shadows, you'd register and contact print (from a film positive or negative, as appropriate), adjusting exposure so that you got the right level of gray (and everything lighter, in the original you worked from) presented as solid black, and everything else as clear film.

If you were making an enlarged negative (as for contact printing for alt-process) you'd treat it in all ways like printing to enlarging paper, and get a grayscale negative of the original (a print positive, which you'd then contact print to another sheet of Kodalith to get an internegative). Done with care in exposure selection and development timing (contrast control was via development, like film, not by grade selection or filtration like printing paper), you could get a negative very close to the same values and contrast as the original -- but big enough to, for instance, make a wall-size cyanotype or VDB print. The stuff came in size at least up to 16x20, may have been available on rolls in larger widths -- and, of course, being ortho sensitive, you could handle it under red safelight.

I think I've seen the A+B developer offered this century, at least, and there are ortho lith films offered in the usual outlets -- you should be able to pick up a box of the film and a package of the developer and lith away...

 

[btaylor]

I also used it in high school- I would print a normal 35mm b&w negative onto 8x10 kodalith (which I got from Freestyle at the time) to make large backlit transparencies. I think I have seen the materials at Photo Warehouse these days. It is pretty fun and also easy as I recall.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Arista Ortho Litho from Freestyle is a high quality product. For manageable pictorial results I'd really avoid paper developers like Dektol, while A&B lith formulas are for extreme contrast "all or none" density applications. I've had good results with HC-110 diluted 1:15 from stock (stock is 1:3 from concentrate).

 

[Donald Qualls]

From what I've seen recently on YouTube, you need to dilute your Dektol equivalent to roughly 10x normal volume (instead of 1+3, you'd use 1+39) to get low-contrast lith film results. If you use print strength Dektol, you'll get high contrast (still pictorial, but more suitable for alt-process). In fact, since you can't control contrast with filters, this is how you do so on lith film -- by changing developer strength.

 

[grainyvision]

There seems to be 3 ortho litho films (at least that are accessible in the US) still being produced that are suitable. Arista and Ars Imago are both extremely similar, they might actually just be the same film but different brand. Ultrafine ortho litho is completely different and tends to be very close to Kodalith.

Arista/Ars Imago is extremely high contrast in most ways of processing and tends to be a slower film (without a chemical flashing solution anyway) that is overall a bit more difficult to tame for pictorial contrast. Start at ISO 1.5 for testing. It's insanely cheap but also only available in sheet film sizes

Ultrafine is a lot easier to get pictorial results from, and tends to be 1-2 stops faster in speed, but might be a bit more difficult to get extremely high contrast results from. It's affordable but kind of expensive got what it is and is available in sheet film sizes as well as perforated 35mm

Unsure exactly what your aim on using this type of film is, but I did a massive amount amount of testing on the Arista stuff that might give you some benefit https://grainy.vision/blog/ortho-litho-reference

 

[ic-racer]

There are many lith-printing tutorials. I did a seminar about ten years ago. Here is a link:
https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/ne-oh-gathering-july-27-28-29-2012.90904/#post-1217465

 

[DREW WILEY]

The problem with Dektol is not only considerable risk of unevenness, but of staining due to excess oxidation at such high dilution, the latter issue making it a roll of the dice in terms of predictability as well. That might be OK for people seeking some kind of funky esthetic in the print. But if you want predictability and a relatively clean neg, there are way better options. If you look at the actual output of those various web videos, or see the work in person, it really is of the "artsy-funky" genre, where visual flaws are welcomed. And one can expect to waste an inordinate amount of film until landing on something even usable. It's not trying to restrict experimentation or dictate any specific "look", but just explaining that if you want to go a predictable clean-neg direction, Dektol is an awfully painful way to attempt that.

 

[grainyvision]

There are many lith-printing tutorials. I did a seminar about ten years ago. Here is a link:
https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/ne-oh-gathering-july-27-28-29-2012.90904/#post-1217465

Oh yea, it's hard to tell just by searching those photographers exactly how their work was created. Looks like it could also involve lith printing. There's plenty of documentation out there, but the easiest way to get started is pick up some Fomatone Warmtone Classic and some Moersch Easy Lith (formaldehyde free!), follow dilution instructions for lith printing (iirc 30+30+1000), over expose the print by 2 stops and develop for 5-10 minutes until it looks interesting. The result will be a very colorful print with unmatched "weirdness" in terms of contrast (basically low contrast highlights, high contrast shadows is the norm) and some visible paper grain. If you don't like the color you can bleach back and develop in a normal paper developer like Dektol to remove it. You can also look up my info previous posts (modernlith) to see some research I've done regarding making other modern papers considered "unlithable" actually work in the process but it requires mixing a custom developer

 

[Donald Qualls]

The problem with Dektol is not only considerable risk of unevenness, but of staining due to excess oxidation at such high dilution, the latter issue making it a roll of the dice in terms of predictability as well. That might be OK for people seeking some kind of funky esthetic in the print. But if you want predictability and a relatively clean neg, there are way better options.

The specific video I was referring to is The Naked Photographer, part 2 of his two-part video on making masks (from early 2019). He uses Ultrafine ortho lith and, yes, develops in Dektol 1:40 to get low contrast, or increases concentration to increase contrast.

There was nothing the least bit "funky" in the masks he made in the video (concentrating on unsharp masks, but also incidentally showing how to make contrast masks with similar technique), no staining or visible unevenness. He was developing the masks one or two minutes (two minutes was too strong, even in 1;40), and might (without mentioning it in the video) have diluted the developer immediately before processing the mask film.

 

[ic-racer]

Here is a recent print I did on Fomatone Warmtone Classic. That may be one of the best current papers on the market.

As a comparison is a print done about 15 years ago on Forte which is long gone from the market.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Donald, you couldn't find a worse film and developer combination for unsharp masking. People use that kind of film because it's cheap, and use Dektol because they apparently don't know better. Ortho Litho was traditionally used at full contrast for highlight masks; but it's less than ideal for even that usage. Advantages? (other than low price): a wide range of sheet sizes. It's thin - an advantage for highlight masks, but certainly not for unsharp contrast masks. The current Arista product has a slight texture, making vac drawdown more efficient, and helps to defeat Newton Rings. Disadvantages : It's a difficult film to develop cleanly at low contrast without stains or surge problems. You get an annoying amount of fbf with a color effect of its own. It's about 70% blue-sensitive, and about 30% green sensitive, so worthless for any color film masking or duplication usage, where pan film is realistically needed. Any unevenness is compounded if there is some kind of double or multiple negative process involved, even in black and white applications. In those videos, there is a helpful introduction to masking; but some of the details aren't particularly sophisticated. And the resulting masks do indeed look funky and stained to me. It's inevitable. If I wanted to start with a high-contrast film (a bad idea in general), I'd reach for some of my old stash of Tech Pan 8x10 sheets; it would be a lot more cooperative than lith film, but merely a slightly cooler of compartment of hell for potential unsharp masking. If someone wants to do it right, I've given relevant hints many times before. But those Naked Photographer web videos do show the right kind of equipment etc.

 

[Bill Burk]

Oh you can develop by inspection under red light so you have a fighting chance of having it come out right

 

[DREW WILEY]

No need. If you use a suitable film and developer instead, you just plot a family of curves and it becomes entirely predictable. Using a pan film sometimes even has its advantages when working with black and white originals. I won't go into detail at the moment. Only slightly related, just this afternoon I was setting up the enlarger to make some 8x10 enlarged registered TMax negatives from 4x5 color chromes. You can use color contrast filters just like shooting real scenes. I printed a couple of those earlier this morning. When I began large format photography, I strictly shot color film. But going back through some of those old chromes recently, I thought to myself, That scene would have sure looked nice in a black and white print too; so there you have it. Making crisp punchy black and prints from color negatives is trickier. Just for the heck of it, since I had a bunch of Ortho Litho sheets lying around, I did it last time using that kind of film, experimentally. Never again. I finally got excellent results; but it would have been ten times easier using something more appropriate. And the orange mask on CN film certainly doesn't get along with blue & green sensitivity. So I did the initial interpositives on highly cooperative TMX, and then deferred to Arista Lith for the final printing re-negative, but it didn't save me any money due to all the headaches. That didn't surprise me at all, but sometimes I'm just in a weird mood for some self-torture in the darkroom.

 

[Donald Qualls]

Okay, where might I find "the right way"? I'm interested in mask making -- mainly curious, truth be known, but I can see where it might be useful (for instance, you have only a single negative of a scene, due to reasons, but you need to decrease contrast or increase edge contrast, or you want to reduce or increase contrast for a single color of a color original).

Yes, obviously you need pan film to do anything from a color original -- but I see this whole process as being a lot easier to learn under safelight before going to materials you must handle in total darkness.

 

[DREW WILEY]

There is no one "right way". Masking is a gigantic tool box with a multitude of options, allowing one to tailor the technique to very specific applications. I don't have time at the moment to get into details, having posted on it many times both on this forum and elsewhere. But if you insist on working under a red safelight with something ortho, I'd recommend you at least learn how to dilute HC-110 way down for sake of developer consistency instead of gambling with Dektol. Another trick is that you can slightly reduce and clear base fog using a brief tray rinse (a minute or so) in Farmer's reducer. Otherwise, those web flicks you already referenced give an idea of the tools involved, which are important for sake of efficiency and accurate registration if one gets into this seriously. But visual registration over a light box and simple taping can be done without fancy gear for sake of learning just the basics. You'd still need a contact frame and some frosted mylar diffusion sheets to expose the mask.

 

[Lachlan Young]

Okay, where might I find "the right way"? I'm interested in mask making -- mainly curious, truth be known, but I can see where it might be useful (for instance, you have only a single negative of a scene, due to reasons, but you need to decrease contrast or increase edge contrast, or you want to reduce or increase contrast for a single color of a color original).

Yes, obviously you need pan film to do anything from a color original -- but I see this whole process as being a lot easier to learn under safelight before going to materials you must handle in total darkness.

Ilford's Ortho+ or Bergger Printfilm are reasonable candidates. Pay attention to Ortho+'s safelight demands, other than that it's not terribly tricky.

 

[Donald Qualls]

Ilford's Ortho+ or Bergger Printfilm are reasonable candidates. Pay attention to Ortho+'s safelight demands, other than that it's not terribly tricky.

How do these products differ from, say, Ultrafine Ortho Lith? Just not being made for lith-type high contrast?

 

[Lachlan Young]

How do these products differ from, say, Ultrafine Ortho Lith? Just not being made for lith-type high contrast?

They're regular continuous tone films, capable of being developed to 'normal' or higher contrast. They just lack red sensitivity.

 

[Donald Qualls]

Okay, so the Ilford is the same ISO 80 they sell in 135 and 120? Assuming the Bergger is similar, these are something like 3 1/3 stops faster than the ortho lith products (which are typically about the same speed as enlarging paper, roundly ISO 6 equivalent). Might be tricky not to wind up with fractional seconds exposure if you don't have a color head that will let you dial in a bunch of neutral density.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Just add a ND filter below the lens