Lets talk Pt/Pd papers

[michael9793]

Okay I have spent over 250 dollars on papers to print on. I stopped doing Pt/Pd about 6 years ago. I started up again about a month and a half ago. I have two papers from back then, a Cot-320, and Platinetype. I love the platinetype but is is out of production. It gives me outstanding tonnes and is very white which I like. B&S say that there Weston Parch. is a great replacement (bull) it is nothing like it at all!!!!!. So I have has some very good advice on the site about some papers and again they are okay but not what I'm looking for. the closest I have seen is from NY Central Art Supplies Arches Platine, But at six buck a sheet I still would like some more options. Good coating ablity, white, shom body to it where I may be able to use it on my 8x20's


thanks
mike andersen:confused:

 

[Vaughn]

Papers papers papers, my kingdom for some dependable papers!

I was having great results with Fabriano Aristico Extra White...closer to $3/sheet than $6. Then the last batch I bought has given me grief -- very small white specks where it looks like the paper has resisted taking in the salts (even after soaking in 2% Oxalic acid.) It has been a while (a year) since I bought it -- it is tempting to buy a few more sheets to see if it has reverted back to its old self.

COT320 -- was great, but the last batch I bought was useless. But that was a couple years ago and I just ordered 25 sheets, hoping it has reverted to its old self.

Weston Diploma Parchment -- bought two separate batches -- both have a hidden crease that does not appear until it gets wet -- and stays in the paper when it dries. Too warm for most of my printing -- and I was just not happy with the results even when everything seemed to be right. Not sharp and with muddy-looking images (or at least not as sharp and clean looking as the Fabriano coated, exposed and processed during the same printing session as the Weston). I did notice one side of the Weston abrades much much easier than the other. I coated the tougher side.

So I am also curious what others have to offer on their knowledge of papers.

Vaughn

 

[lotto]

I think you should bite the bullet and get the Arches Platine ,especially for the 8x20. You might try double coating it.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

I have been printing exclusively on COT320 for almost two years now. I have found it to be very dependable - it has great wet strength, brilliant whites, is very economical with emulsion solutions ( 7:7 drop count for a 5x7, might even be able to squeeze it down to 6:6).

 

[colrehogan]

I have used both COT 320 and Arches Platine. I have been using Arches Platine regularly for about a year or two now. I like my results with it. I buy it in the 22x30" sheet size (25 pack) from a local retailer and cut it myself when I need it.

 

[Ian Leake]

Arches Platine or COT320 sounds just what you need. I don't like COT320 because, although it's easy to coat and gets great results, all the coating (gelatine?) floats off into the developer which then needs constant filtering. Platine is also slightly smoother. Both are white, heavy and easy to work with. Platine doesn't seem to like pure platinum prints (haven't tried with COT320).

Weston Diploma is too warm for my taste and has terrible wet handling and drying problems. But again, it's lovely to coat.

I've just started using Buxton from Ruscombe Mill in France. It's very expensive and hard to get hold of (you have to order direct from the mill), but it's the most beautiful paper I've seen. It's colder than Platine, got a gorgeous texture, and has fantastic wet handling. But it does seem more sensitive to precipitate/particles than most of the other papers I've used.

 

[Ian Leake]

Oh, and I wouldn't try double coating platine unless you're a masochist. Try pre-treating with oxalic acid before coating to get a darker tone if you must have one...

 

[RobertP]

New York Central carries Buxton. It was developed by Ruscombe in collaboration with Michael Ware for platinum printing. It is a beautiful paper. They have it in both 180 gr/m2 and 240 gr/m2 weights. The 180 is 11.00 a sheet and the 240 is 13.75. You get a break at 25 sheets. 9.00 and 12.38 for the heavier paper. I also like Platine but I was fortunate to run into about 600 sheets of the old Swiss Opaline a few years ago so I bought every sheet from the guy...Gorgeous paper. You never know when they are going to change or stop making a good platinum paper. I use the weston paper once in awhile but I don't care for the yellowish tint. I wish they made it in a whiter version. Cot 320 will always work for you.

 

[Monophoto]

Cranes 90# cover was the first paper that I printed on, and I liked it much more than others. For a while, B&S recommended against it because of problems with the shear used in cutting factory rolls into sheets, but I thought I read somewhere that this problem was temporary and has been resolved. Any new information?

I've printed recently on Weston Parchment - yes, it coats easily, but its a bit warmer than I prefer, and it is extremely fragile when wet.

I've also printed (successfully) on Cranes kid finish writing paper, but I suggest this only for 4x5 negatives - it's just too fragile for practical use on larger prints. However, one does have to be sensitive about the watermark in the paper.

 

[Robert Hall]

I've been using Platine for 8ish years now. I think it's always been a great paper. I have tried many others, but keep coming back.

I have heard of some having problems with it and have found some coating the wrong side which renders less than desirable results.

I've found some places that I have been able to get it for $4 a sheet when bought in bulk.

 

[photomc]

Cranes Platinotype (aka Cranes Cover Stock), Arches Platine - a very close cousin to COT320 I think, Fabriano Artistico Extra White - current favored paper in use (does require the OA bath, but works well for gum over as well). Have not used it, but have heard that Rives BFK is a good paper -give the Arentz book a look for other papers as well.

As others have mentioned, papers tend to change so what works today, may not later...I try to buy a good stock when I can. COT320 does coat well, but the cost is a bit high and sometimes I find it too white.

 

[nick mulder]

well, seems like everyone gets different results with the papers

COT320 was my paper of choice but I always noticed blotchiness in the midtones when using high concentrations of #2 Soln.

The two papers that have solved this issue are cranes kid finish (ecru) and the Cranes Diploma Parchment (I cant get Arches Platine here) - the kid finish needs a very careful hand as it will rip easily in washing, the watermark cannot be seen once it is flat against something else and it is no longer back-lit, you'd have to be very critical and looking for it to find it ... The prints are darker, but some negs call for this - different horses ...

The Diploma Parchment washes very fast wont rip and gives even tones in large flat areas so I've just ordered a 75 sheets in 11x14 ...

I still have some COT320 left and have been learning how to get good Pd negatives in my current chemistry so keep the #2 soln. low - I'm looking forward to the arrival of some pyro to try out also...

The thin 'Kozo' papers from B&S is interesting in that you can change the tone of the print by backing it with other papers - its 'resolution' is a bit rough however and it takes a bit more chemistry to coat.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

Nick - which #2 solution are you referring to? Ferric Oxalate #2 for contrast control? ICK! take that bottle and throw it as far as you can as fast and hard as you are able...
Get yourself a bottle of either NA2 or Dichromate. It makes all the difference in the world.

That said, learn how to make a proper neg for pt/pd so you don't need to use any contrasting agent. I'm printing using NA2 as my contrasting agent and if I use it, I use 1 drop per 5x7, in a 1:3 NA2istilled water ratio. The NA2 is expensive up front, but it goes a LONG way.

 

[rbergeman]

my kingdom for a smooth, white paper with deep blacks

well, what great timing ! -- i got on-line tonight to broach this ever recurring question regarding good pt/pd papers .... ever since the crane's cover (or platinotype, depending on who's selling it) went weird about a year ago, i have been searching in vain for a comparable replacement -- an affordable white paper with a smooth surface..... cranes never had the best dmax, but it was dependable and capable of nice smooth finishes in skies/water surfaces/et.al., so i really miss it .... i find i agree with most everything that has been posted on this issue ..... in the past couple of months or so i have bought and tried a variety of papers, and in the interest of furthering the discussion, here's what i've found out:

cott320 -- great dmax and contrast; it takes a lower contrast ferric ox. mix than other papers for the same negs (i.e., less f.ox.#2), which i like; also tends to be a little mottled in smooth tonal areas, which i don't like, even with humidifying and tween; at $2+ per 11x14 sheet, it's a bit spendy, unfortunately ... coats better with brush than coating rod

arches platine -- i've used this paper off and on for several years and it seems pretty dependable, with nice black values (not as deep as cott320) and good weight; it's a little cheaper than cott320 if you buy the big sheets (i get them from daniel smith--is there a cheaper source); however, i have the same problem with uneven smooth-tone values as with cott320 .... seems to work best with a brush (vs. rod) and without tween

weston parchmont -- deep black values, but kind of muddy, as someone else noted .... i also discovered occasional splotches, as well as that crease that a previous poster commented on..... it's cheap, but basically too off-white, too flimsy and too unpredictable

artistico fabriano bright white -- affordable paper, nice surface, but so far i haven't gotten deep blacks with it, and it seems to require nearly twice the exposure as cott320, weston or arches platine .... however, the jury is still out on this one -- if anyone who uses this paper has advice on how to treat it well, please let me know, as i've got a bunch to keep trying

lenox -- i tried this after reading the list of papers researched by dick arentz and his colleague (who's name escapes me right now, my apologies -- dick nelson??) .... they thought it was second only to cranes platinotype in tone quality, but something must have changed in the few years since they did that list, because now it's crap -- can't get anything but ghost images out of it .....

rives bfk -- against all advice, i tried this paper that a painter gave me .... big mistake -- must have something in it that pt/pd doesn't like

so far, my conclusion is to work with arches platine and cott 320 and seek solutions to the smooth tone problems in other ways (tips welcome) -- otherwise, i may be forever aiming below the horizon!

rich bergeman

 

[Peter Schrager]

papers

just started printing again. the weston paper is just in the ok corral. using cranes natural white with great success. cot paper is always dependable but sometimes too white. realized that I have the ruscombe paper and will try it tomorrow. just trying to standardize for a while so it will be the CNW until I've used up my 300 sheets. also have the cranes flourescent white-this is either cot or the platine. can't keep it straight....but it prints well seems weird to me that if one finds a paper that you like and do not invest in buying a stash for yourself and with the cost of doing platinum to begin with...you all know what I'm trying to say...
Best, Peter

 

[photomc]

Rich, try using a 2% oxalic acid bath on the Fabriano (if it is the Artistico Extra White) and the Rives BFK. The 2nd edition of the Arentz book does list Lenox 100 (Parsons), but do not have any experience with the paper so can not help there. I would say the blacks I get with FAEW are very close to what I have seen with Platine (and not that far from that of COT320).

Oh yeah, Welcome to APUG...enjoy.

 

[rbergeman]

will do, thanks for the tip

 

[nick mulder]

Nick - which #2 solution are you referring to? Ferric Oxalate #2 for contrast control? ICK! take that bottle and throw it as far as you can as fast and hard as you are able...
Get yourself a bottle of either NA2 or Dichromate. It makes all the difference in the world.

That said, learn how to make a proper neg for pt/pd so you don't need to use any contrasting agent. I'm printing using NA2 as my contrasting agent and if I use it, I use 1 drop per 5x7, in a 1:3 NA2istilled water ratio. The NA2 is expensive up front, but it goes a LONG way.

I know! I know! - I'm still trucking through B&S kit chems and have found info on these 'alternative' alternative pt/pd processes harder to find, many a thread but the info is hard to distill from all the noise - Next order I'm stocking up on Ziatype chems as I'd like to give POP a crack with the Dichromate, hopefully that should solve it - The real solution as you allude to is in the negative anyway, I have been using D19 (BPF200) which I've been souping for 20 mins at 22deg, no idea really what speed I'm rating the film (200 on the meter) but I'm kind of letting the bellows extension take care of the 'push' :rolleyes: - anyway, its working acceptably now - got both HC110 and Pyro on the way with the Zia chem to test with, should be interesting ...

 

[Vaughn]

Rich B.,

I'll second the soaking the Fabriano Aristico EW in 2% Oxalic acid until it stops fizzing, then hang it up to dry. From my limited experience, much richer blacks that way (also shorter exposure times).

I have also gone to using the puddle pusher for a couple passes, then finish off with a brush.

Vaughn

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

The real solution as you allude to is in the negative anyway, I have been using D19 (BPF200) which I've been souping for 20 mins at 22deg, no idea really what speed I'm rating the film (200 on the meter) but I'm kind of letting the bellows extension take care of the 'push' :rolleyes: - anyway, its working acceptably now - got both HC110 and Pyro on the way with the Zia chem to test with, should be interesting ...

Nick- if anything, if you are doing close ups and have bellows extension that would require compensation, you're making it worse, not better. You want a meaty negative, with good shadow detail. Pt/Pd and most other alt processes will handle your highlights regardless. Standard operating procedure is rate your film 1 stop slower (if BPF200, expose at 100...), process 10-20% longer than you would for silver gelatin printing negs, assuming you're printing in Pt/Pd.

 

[michael9793]

Something I have found is, the best negatives for printing have a Dmax of 1.20 or around there. My EE UV Box prints at around 6 mins. My negatives at 1.75 are round 30-50 mins exposures. These are developed in pyrcat-hd for Azo and silver printing. I have been keeping a note book on negative exposures and densitometer readings to get a idea of exposure times with this new light. So I'm finding my thinner negatves (still have good shadow detail) print better. make sense to you. I'm ordering the platine paper today and give that a try. sec. Cot 320 is not white it is a slight cream. at least compared to my platinotype I have left.

mike

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

Mike- I think that depends on A: which developer you're using, and B: what the blend of ptd you're using. The more pd, the warmer the base will look in all but a masked, uncoated area, and the same holds true depending on your developer - hot PotOx will give a much warmer print than cold Ammonium citrate will. Any of these factors could be drivers in making your COT320 seem warm-ish.

 

[sanking]

I like to print with negatives of high density range, log 1.8 minimum to log 2.4. This gives me best results in carbon, and also allows printing without contrast controls with pure palladium and vandyke. If I had to use contrast controls I would do it with either Na2 or by adding dichromate to the developer. Both these methods are more straight forward than the old ABC methods IMHO.

I like the Weston parchement paper. It gives very good Dmax and a very warm looking print. But you must be very careful in handling it wet as it tears easily. I purchase the Weston paper directly from the manufacturer in 100 sheet box.

Never have had a problem with COTE 320 and I consider it the most trouble free paper out there, with a very white base. I would suggest that if you final print does not have a very white base there may be some process staining.

Sandy King

 

[Kerik]

I think Michael is comparing COT 320 to the bright white version of Platinotype which, to me, is TOO white with almost a bluish cold hint to it. COT 320 and Platine are both going to appear slightly creamy in comparison. I've never been a fan of any of the versions of Platinotype...

 

[lallan]

I have been using Cot 320 and Platine now for over a year with no problems. However, made a print on Platine the other day that had an edge problem - not the paper, but a masking problem (3 layers of Goldenrod and still some density in the print - and a dark line where the edge of the negative was - compression exposure ??) - ANYWAY, no Platine left on the shelf so I tried an old paper that I hadn't used in awhile, Stonehenge. Worked great - liked it better than Platine for this negative. Don't know why I move away from it. ALSO, about buying paper, I have been using Stephen Kinsella and last time I bought paper from them, I heard that Platine was acting up so they sent me 1 sheet from a pack to try before I committed to 25 sheets of the stuff. Nice service (and I gladly pay for shipping over dragging the stuff thru the subways!).......lyle