Liquid emulsions.. who is doing it?

Dog Opposites

A
Dog Opposites

  • 2
  • 3
  • 115
Acrobatics in the Vondelpark

A
Acrobatics in the Vondelpark

  • 6
  • 5
  • 200
Finn Slough Fishing Net

A
Finn Slough Fishing Net

  • 1
  • 0
  • 112
Dried roses

A
Dried roses

  • 14
  • 8
  • 206
Hot Rod

A
Hot Rod

  • 5
  • 0
  • 120

Recent Classifieds

Forum statistics

Threads
197,471
Messages
2,759,577
Members
99,514
Latest member
cukon
Recent bookmarks
1

gandolfi

Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2005
Messages
1,820
Location
Denmark
Format
Large Format Pan
...emulsions I mean? :wink:

I am doing it a lot - have done it for many many years, but as the galleries in here doesn't tell much, I was qurious to know, whether I am alone in my bliss, or if there were others "doing it"....

(LE beats almost all papers! prove me wrong...)
 

removed account4

Subscriber
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
Messages
29,844
Format
Hybrid
i've been doing it off and on for a handful of years.
it is a lot of fun :smile:
i was going to make my own, as PE does, but time is not something i have a lot of, so i just buy it at the store.
 
OP
OP
gandolfi

gandolfi

Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2005
Messages
1,820
Location
Denmark
Format
Large Format Pan
Photo Engineer said:
When I want to do it, I make my own.

PE

simple or?

I've only tried a very simple home made emulsion once - lots of fun, but the product I can buy is still so much much better (yet)..

I know the SE1 best (from Kentmere I think)
used it for years.
I have recently have been familiar to the emulsion FOMA makes - that's quality for you..(I didn't get enough last time I was in Prague; won't make that mistake next time....)

I also know Liquid light from Rochland (too difficult for me......)
Tetenal "WORK" which is far too expensive..
MACO VC (not good in my first experience, but I am gonna do it some more.)

in short: 80% of my images are now made in liquid emulsions - it is actually cheaper (and much better) than "normal" papers..
(quicker too)
 

removed account4

Subscriber
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
Messages
29,844
Format
Hybrid
gandolfi said:
simple or?

I've only tried a very simple home made emulsion once - lots of fun, but the product I can buy is still so much much better (yet)..

I know the SE1 best (from Kentmere I think)
used it for years.
I have recently have been familiar to the emulsion FOMA makes - that's quality for you..(I didn't get enough last time I was in Prague; won't make that mistake next time....)

I also know Liquid light from Rochland (too difficult for me......)
Tetenal "WORK" which is far too expensive..
MACO VC (not good in my first experience, but I am gonna do it some more.)

in short: 80% of my images are now made in liquid emulsions - it is actually cheaper (and much better) than "normal" papers..
(quicker too)

have you ever used the emulsion by luminos ?
it is really fast and pretty amazing stuff.
too expensive for me :sad:
 

David A. Goldfarb

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Sep 7, 2002
Messages
19,981
Location
Honolulu, HI
Format
Large Format
Luminos papers were Kentmere, and I'd bet the emulsion was as well.
 

Photo Engineer

Subscriber
Joined
Apr 19, 2005
Messages
29,021
Location
Rochester, NY
Format
Multi Format
A typical emulsion, as I posted elsewhere, uses 4 ml for a 4x5 print or about 16ml for 1 8x10. One run uses 5.1 grams of silver nitrate and makes about 120 ml of emulsion or about 8 8x10s.

Since my last post above, I was in the darkroom making emulsions. I made 2 with (hopefully) two contrast grades. I also coatated 4 4x5 sheets on Strathmore paper to test them out. I make double size batches now that I have it down, so I made two 240 ml batches actually. If I have time, I may make a 3rd tonight. The coatings are drying in a paper safe right now. If everything goes as planned, I will have 3 contrast grades of emulsion, and after some extra fiddling in the darkroom, I will have 2 speed ranges with 3 contrasts.

That does not seem to be a long time or an inordinate expense on my part, but you may feel otherwise. Making it yourself is very flexible. You can pick and choose once you get used to the lab procedures.

PE
 

David A. Goldfarb

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Sep 7, 2002
Messages
19,981
Location
Honolulu, HI
Format
Large Format
In the other thread you mentioned that you liked Bruce Kahn's formula. I'm interested in trying it (but probably won't get to it for at least a month, because I need to order supplies, and I'll be traveling, so--no rush). How would you adjust the contrast grade in that formula?
 

Photo Engineer

Subscriber
Joined
Apr 19, 2005
Messages
29,021
Location
Rochester, NY
Format
Multi Format
I am working on the methodology of contrast control.

It is related to halide content, size frequency distribution, and gelatin. I don't have everything down pat, so I keep getting grades ~1.0 and ~2.0, but I can't do better than that. Basically I have 2 grades of paper, but that isn't enough. Also, the lower grade has too low a maximum density which I must work on as well.

If you can get the papers from Agfa which were collected at the end of WWII, there is a discussion in there on contrast control of paper emulsions. Much of it is in German or uses German technical terms. It isn't too hard to follow with a good dictionary.

PE
 

David A. Goldfarb

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Sep 7, 2002
Messages
19,981
Location
Honolulu, HI
Format
Large Format
Thanks!
 

removed account4

Subscriber
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
Messages
29,844
Format
Hybrid
David A. Goldfarb said:
Luminos papers were Kentmere, and I'd bet the emulsion was as well.

thanks dave!
between all the rebadged film and paper, my head is spinning.

how does anyone keep all this renaming straight ?
 
OP
OP
gandolfi

gandolfi

Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2005
Messages
1,820
Location
Denmark
Format
Large Format Pan
Photo Engineer said:
I am working on the methodology of contrast control.

It is related to halide content, size frequency distribution, and gelatin. I don't have everything down pat, so I keep getting grades ~1.0 and ~2.0, but I can't do better than that. Basically I have 2 grades of paper, but that isn't enough. Also, the lower grade has too low a maximum density which I must work on as well.

If you can get the papers from Agfa which were collected at the end of WWII, there is a discussion in there on contrast control of paper emulsions. Much of it is in German or uses German technical terms. It isn't too hard to follow with a good dictionary.

PE
as I said before, I have tried to make it my self once - a little soft, but good fun..
about the grades: I've found out that TETENAL "Eukobrom" developer makes quite high contrast - TETENAL "Centrabrom" quite low and AGFA Neutol WA something in the middle..

that way I kind of have three grades in one paper.. Works great..
 

Ryuji

Member
Joined
Jan 15, 2005
Messages
1,415
Location
Boston, MA
Format
Multi Format
Ron, are you doing optimal sulfur sensitization? Low Dmax and low gamma sound like something is way off.

Sounds like you are doing classic single jets. I have made paper emulsions of up to grade 4 with sulfur, but the same emulsion gives me a grade or two lower contrast with good sulfur sensitization. Also, the kind of gelatin has large effects on this, especially if you are not using suitable dopants. If the gelatin contains nucleic acid decomposition products (such as adenine) growth is restrained and grain size distribution tends to be more less disperse. These are more often found in hide gelatins, which Germans used to blend with bone gelatin to control contrast. I consider this kind of black art approach largely obsolete in the light of modern emulsion science and more sure-fire methods of doing this. Another factor is pAg at the ripening stage. If the pAg is too high, grains will become more polydisperse and you won't get gamma, and you won't be able to do optimal digestion.

Now I do double jets in the conditions suitable to make tabular grains. Steps are more complicated, but grade 4 comes more easily than with single jet, of course. And Dmax is VERY high even if I reduce coating weight.

BTW you can make t-grain with single jet as well, thought the quality is supposed to be inferior. But this way very usable emulsion of decent gamma, speed and good Dmax can be made rather simply. The drawback is a bit longer fixing time but that's something I can live with.


Photo Engineer said:
I am working on the methodology of contrast control.

It is related to halide content, size frequency distribution, and gelatin. I don't have everything down pat, so I keep getting grades ~1.0 and ~2.0, but I can't do better than that. Basically I have 2 grades of paper, but that isn't enough. Also, the lower grade has too low a maximum density which I must work on as well.

If you can get the papers from Agfa which were collected at the end of WWII, there is a discussion in there on contrast control of paper emulsions. Much of it is in German or uses German technical terms. It isn't too hard to follow with a good dictionary.

PE
 

gnashings

Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2005
Messages
1,376
Location
Oshawa, Onta
Format
Multi Format
Sorry if this is off-topic, but could someone tell me why and how they are "better" than regular paper? I am not arguing - I simply don't know. Thanks,

Peter.
 

Ryuji

Member
Joined
Jan 15, 2005
Messages
1,415
Location
Boston, MA
Format
Multi Format
Do you mean hand coated paper v commercial paper?

That's obvious. You get to choose the substrate, and if you choose paper, you can choose tint, surface, etc. Then you get to control whether you coat to the edges, leave brush marks, etc. When I make my own emulsions, I can make paper emulsion with rather pronounced shoulder so that the image looks old timey.

If your goal is hi-fi of b&w photography, you can safely stick with Ilford Multigrade RC and you won't be missing much.

gnashings said:
Sorry if this is off-topic, but could someone tell me why and how they are "better" than regular paper? I am not arguing - I simply don't know. Thanks,

Peter.
 

Photo Engineer

Subscriber
Joined
Apr 19, 2005
Messages
29,021
Location
Rochester, NY
Format
Multi Format
Ryuji, I now have grades from about 1 - 4 with dmax and dmin being acceptable. I have achieved both sulfur sensitization and spectral (ortho) sensitivity.

I have a range of speeds from contact grade through fast enlarger speed, and one emulsion which is ISO 25, as exposed in-camera. I have 4 sensitizing dyes I'm working with and 4 emulsions. I have several types of gelatin to use to adjust the emulsion characteristics as well. I expect that I may achieve an ISO speed of 100 soon, if all goes well, but who knows.

PE
 

Ryuji

Member
Joined
Jan 15, 2005
Messages
1,415
Location
Boston, MA
Format
Multi Format
Ron, that's good progress, and good luck.


Photo Engineer said:
Ryuji, I now have grades from about 1 - 4 with dmax and dmin being acceptable. I have achieved both sulfur sensitization and spectral (ortho) sensitivity.

I have a range of speeds from contact grade through fast enlarger speed, and one emulsion which is ISO 25, as exposed in-camera. I have 4 sensitizing dyes I'm working with and 4 emulsions. I have several types of gelatin to use to adjust the emulsion characteristics as well. I expect that I may achieve an ISO speed of 100 soon, if all goes well, but who knows.

PE
 

gnashings

Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2005
Messages
1,376
Location
Oshawa, Onta
Format
Multi Format
Thanks. Do you ever put it on lets say, canvas? How would you dev that? I've been wanting to try some alternative surfaces (wood, rock) for some images - as well as the rather "done to death" canvas... But I am a bit scared because I don't know how to handle any of the processes. Do you spray the emulsion on for even coating (I have an airbrush), or does it give adequate smoothness and even coverage from brushing?
Sorryto hijack the thread - let me know if I am getting too way off topic here.
Thanks again for the info,

Peter.
 

Ryuji

Member
Joined
Jan 15, 2005
Messages
1,415
Location
Boston, MA
Format
Multi Format
I used all sorts of paper, several plastic films, glass plate, some ceramic tiles, etc. I generally get very good adhesion on paper, some plastic, glass and ceramic. What I use the most are paper and glass. They are very easy to coat.

Some people use canvas but not me. You'll have to handle it very carefully, but otherwise similarly to fiber based paper. Though I have no experience with 3D objects, I'd use brush or finger (on nitrile gloves) to coat emulsion. (If the object is small, I would also consider dip coating.) I'd make two or three thin coats with brush or finger. But the reason people use liquid emulsion products is because they want to use some imperfection as a part of the art. I personally coat the paper after selecting the image and decide how big I want to blow up, where to burn-in by how many stops, etc. (do the "preview" with AGFA paper.) If you seek perfect hi-fi type reproruction you should look elsewhere, such as digital printers.

Anyway, creative use of commercial liquid emulsion products are discussed among alt-process people, so you might want to look into that group.

A note: silver-gelatin emulsion has a huge advantage over most other chemical photographic processes in terms of enlarging speed, thus eliminating the need to make enlarged negatives. Silver-gelatin is the ideal process if you want to make 3D or large prints that is difficult to handle with contact print processes.


gnashings said:
Thanks. Do you ever put it on lets say, canvas? How would you dev that? I've been wanting to try some alternative surfaces (wood, rock) for some images - as well as the rather "done to death" canvas... But I am a bit scared because I don't know how to handle any of the processes. Do you spray the emulsion on for even coating (I have an airbrush), or does it give adequate smoothness and even coverage from brushing?
Sorryto hijack the thread - let me know if I am getting too way off topic here.
Thanks again for the info,

Peter.
 

Photo Engineer

Subscriber
Joined
Apr 19, 2005
Messages
29,021
Location
Rochester, NY
Format
Multi Format
The book "Silver Gelatin" by Reed and Jones is excellent on this topic. I highly recommend it to all interested in this.

I have coated canvas with my emulsion using a paint brush. It gets pretty limp during coating and processing. Kind of like working with a big paper towel, except it doesn't tear.

Thanks Ryuji for your comment. Your do very good work yourself and have made a lot of progress. I'm still working on my emulsions. They are no where near optimum, but I do have values for Sulfur, Dye, and Iodide content. Now it is a matter of combining them all at one time instead of doing one at a time or doing them in pairs. I have tried them in pairs but not all 3 in one experiment. That will probably be next week.

PE
 

sanking

Member
Joined
Mar 26, 2003
Messages
5,437
Location
Greenville,
Format
Large Format
Photo Engineer said:
The book "Silver Gelatin" by Reed and Jones is excellent on this topic. I highly recommend it to all interested in this.

I have coated canvas with my emulsion using a paint brush. It gets pretty limp during coating and processing. Kind of like working with a big paper towel, except it doesn't tear.


PE

I am not surprised that people would want to make their own emulsions. After all, I make carbon tissue and also print with a number of other alternative processes.

But why one would go to this much trouble for silver based photography? Why not use something more permanent like platinum or palladium?

I am assuming for this discussion artistic use of the emulsion as opposed to scientific experimentation and/or playful tinkering, which needs no further justification.

Sandy
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Ryuji

Member
Joined
Jan 15, 2005
Messages
1,415
Location
Boston, MA
Format
Multi Format
Changing the location of iodide distribution in the grain has a huge impact on all subsequent operations. It is especially true if you are single jetting and adding iodide to the kettle, or adding iodide through a separate jet during precipitation or growth.

When iodide is added, a crystalline lattice defect is introduced, and this will appear as dislocation lines. This factor has a huge impact on the response of the grain to ripening and growth stages of the crystals. In particular, if you add iodide to the kettle, the crystal will be smaller and they will be a lot slower to ripen or grow. You'll have to downregulate the jets during growth to avoid renucleation, perhaps in addition to ripeners (like a combination of thioether and ammonium sulfate) in case of bromide emulsions. Also, because crystals are smaller and there is greater total surface area, you'll need to upregulate sulfur sensitization and spectral sensitization to maintain optimal digestion. Here, it's very important to control grain size distribution because if there are large grains here and there, then those grains will be fogged way before smaller grains become fully sensitized. Thus you should aim least disperse emulsion, which also gives highest contrast. If you want lower contrast, as in the case of negative emulsions, you should blend 3 emulsions of different grain sizes. Here, it's important to design each emulsion so that they can develop together.

Crystals with dislocation lines introduced at the optimal location will have higher sensitivity than crystals free of such intentional defects, even after optimal S+Au digestion and spectral sensitization. This is one key technology Fuji scientists figured out around 1990.

People like Trivelli, Smith, Carroll, et al. did not know about this very important and intriguing fact, so their experimental data are all over the place and it's hard to make a systematic understanding of what they observed. Many studies varied iodide content and measured photographic speed, but no wonder, their results are mixed. So the emulsion making had been called a black art. But thanks to people like Urabe, Tani and others at Fuji, the mechanisms underlying this were largely figured out.

Most of recent emulsion related patents incorporate one or more steps to take advantage of this knowledge, although Fuji and Kodak patents usually use different steps.

Photo Engineer said:
The book "Silver Gelatin" by Reed and Jones is excellent on this topic. I highly recommend it to all interested in this.

I have coated canvas with my emulsion using a paint brush. It gets pretty limp during coating and processing. Kind of like working with a big paper towel, except it doesn't tear.

Thanks Ryuji for your comment. Your do very good work yourself and have made a lot of progress. I'm still working on my emulsions. They are no where near optimum, but I do have values for Sulfur, Dye, and Iodide content. Now it is a matter of combining them all at one time instead of doing one at a time or doing them in pairs. I have tried them in pairs but not all 3 in one experiment. That will probably be next week.

PE
 

Photo Engineer

Subscriber
Joined
Apr 19, 2005
Messages
29,021
Location
Rochester, NY
Format
Multi Format
Sandy, some of the benefits of silver halide include sensitization to various portions of the spectrum other than just UV, and also the potential for various speeds.

Along with making the emulsions, I am working on methods to improve hand coating. This will work for any light sensitive system, even carbon.

Ryuji, what were once trade secrets are now patents, I guess. The work by Trivelli, Smith and Carroll are ancient in the world of emulsion making. Work such as you describe as 'new' was underway at Kodak in the 60s and 70s. Now they have the 2 electron sensitization and dye layering.

I am well aware of Burt Carroll's work in particular. He and his wife and my wife and I used to vacation at the same place for several years. He was quite old at the time, but still very sharp. We used to sit on the porch of the hotel and discuss this work and other more recent investigations back in the late 70s and early 80s IIRC. He was very fascinating to talk to.

But, just incidentally, iodide levels were used by Agfa at one time to achieve the various contrast grades of B&W paper that they manufactured. Kodak used that and other proprietary technology.

I'm afraid that better than 50% of the technology in making film and paper is still classed as industrial secrets or proprietary information. At least, I would say that this is true for Kodak. Major innovations teach the core of the invention in patents, but implementation still remains an art by some definition of the term. This does not mean that the patents are in any way invalid or incomplete. One can surely demonstrate and use the invention by the examples, but the product can be far different. In part this is due to what must be done between research and manufacturing to achieve high speed coating with batch to batch uniformity.

It is one thing to make a small batch of something, and another to scale it up by 10000x. That is a true black art.

PE
 

gnashings

Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2005
Messages
1,376
Location
Oshawa, Onta
Format
Multi Format
Ryuji said:
I used all sorts of paper, several plastic films, glass plate, some ceramic tiles, etc. I generally get very good adhesion on paper, some plastic, glass and ceramic. What I use the most are paper and glass. They are very easy to coat.

Some people use canvas but not me. You'll have to handle it very carefully, but otherwise similarly to fiber based paper. Though I have no experience with 3D objects, I'd use brush or finger (on nitrile gloves) to coat emulsion. (If the object is small, I would also consider dip coating.) I'd make two or three thin coats with brush or finger. But the reason people use liquid emulsion products is because they want to use some imperfection as a part of the art. I personally coat the paper after selecting the image and decide how big I want to blow up, where to burn-in by how many stops, etc. (do the "preview" with AGFA paper.) If you seek perfect hi-fi type reproruction you should look elsewhere, such as digital printers.

Anyway, creative use of commercial liquid emulsion products are discussed among alt-process people, so you might want to look into that group.

A note: silver-gelatin emulsion has a huge advantage over most other chemical photographic processes in terms of enlarging speed, thus eliminating the need to make enlarged negatives. Silver-gelatin is the ideal process if you want to make 3D or large prints that is difficult to handle with contact print processes.


Thanks - sorry about the beginner questions - I'llbe quiet now:smile: And am not interested in using a printer - especially that my enlarger will give me better results.
 

sanking

Member
Joined
Mar 26, 2003
Messages
5,437
Location
Greenville,
Format
Large Format
Photo Engineer said:
Sandy, some of the benefits of silver halide include sensitization to various portions of the spectrum other than just UV, and also the potential for various speeds.

Along with making the emulsions, I am working on methods to improve hand coating. This will work for any light sensitive system, even carbon.

PE

Ron,

Have you every done any hand coating of carbon tissue?

If not, you will find that the kind of coating machines that would work well for coating silver emulsions won't work at all for carbon. The amount of coating that you have to apply is much thicker, and the coating and setting temperatures are critical so that any leveling surface that passed over the top of pigmented gelatin solution would have to very warm so as to dissipate bubbles.

But maybe you know something about the way the dye matrix film was manufactured? I presume that some of the same principles that apply to coating this film would also apply to carbon.

And, by the way, was not there someone who has/had a coating machine for dye matrix film for sale? Someone mentioned this to me but I never followed up on it because I have my own coating method perfected to the point where I can make some 12-14 24X30" sheets in an evening's work, more than enough to keep me busy with carbon printing for a 2-3 weeks.

Sandy
 
Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links.
To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here.

PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Ilford ADOX Freestyle Photographic Stearman Press Weldon Color Lab Blue Moon Camera & Machine
Top Bottom