Mike Ware's Simple Cyanotype

[Andrew O'Neill]

I tried it... (thank you to Niranjan on how to make and sub Triammonium Citrate for the Ammonia)

 

[gbroadbridge]

Thanks Andrew, I was going to try that process myself, but it seems that all the work involved calibrating everything may not be worthwhile when I'm already seeing quite reasonable results with the original process.

 

[mshchem]

Fascinating, I look forward to seeing your next video and conclusions.

 

[Raghu Kuvempunagar]

Andrew, Mike Ware's original Simple Cyanotype comes in three contrast variants depending upon the amount of Ammonia used in the synthesis - high contrast (exposure scale ~1.8, pH ~8), medium contrast (exposure scale ~ 2.3, pH ~6) and low contrast (exposure scale ~ 2.7, pH ~2.7). The high contrast variant has substantially more Ammonia (and consequently higher pH) than the other two. Intermeidate exposure scales can be handled by appropriately mixing the high and low contrast sensitisers. And with neutral water development instead of the usual acidic water development, the high contrast version can work with exposure scale ~1.3.

Now, the alternative process that you have used to make the sensitiser gives you, I suspect, the low contrast variant as it uses Ammonium Citrate (stoichiometrically synthesised from Citric Acid and Ammonium Carbonate) and doesn't have the excess of Ammonia needed for the high contrast version. That's why Mike Ware wrote "this version lacks the range of exposure scale control" and gave it a different name - "Mike's Cyanotype". It's not surprising that you had to use a negative with higher density range to get an acceptable print from your sensitiser. You may want to check pH of your sensitiser to confirm.

 

[PGum]

exposure scale ~ 2.7, pH ~2.7

Raghu, I am sure you meant pH 4!

Peter

 

[Raghu Kuvempunagar]

Raghu, I am sure you meant pH 4!

Peter

You're right. Thanks for the correction.

Today I tried the following synthesis process for Simple Cyanotype high contrast version:

Solution A
Water: 25 ml
Citric Acid (anhydrous) : 12 g (Equivalently, Citric Acid monohydrate 13 g)
Ferric Nitrate (nonahydrate): 12 g

Solution B
Water: 50 ml
Ammonium Carbonate: 14 g

Add solution B slowly to solution A and stir well. Will fizz.
Top it to 100 ml.

pH ~ 7.5

I could have added more Ammonium Carbonate to get pH to ~8 but stopped.

I used 2 ml of this and 0.2 g of Potassium Ferricyanide to coat a A4 sized Canson Montval 185 gsm cold pressed paper that had been coated earlier with 5 ml of 10% Ammonium Chloride solution. The resulting FerroBlend print had nice split-tone effect. I toned the print with the following toner:

Water: 200 ml
Copper Sulphate: 2.5 g
Ammonium Carbonate: 5 g

Used about 25 ml of the toner for toning the print (about two minutes). Blue shifted towards black and highlights brightened a bit. The toned FerroBlend print looks good to me. Will post the print pic tomorrow.

 

[Raghu Kuvempunagar]

Will post the print pic tomorrow.

 

[nmp]

View attachment 406178

Very nice, Raghu.

:Niranjan

 

[Raghu Kuvempunagar]

Very nice, Raghu.

:Niranjan

Thanks Niranjan.

Today I made two more FerroBlend prints of my family members using the same sensitiser and the prints came out well. I am yet to use it for Cyanotype but I feel it will work fine for that purpose too. Will find out soon.

 

[BHuij]

Is this different from "New Cyanotype?" I got some good results with New Cyanotype, but for the life of me couldn't get the contrast to behave consistently, and ultimately concluded that it's not a good match for my chosen paper, HPR. I told myself next time I get the hankering for blue prints, I'll try traditional cyanotype. I already have everything I need for it. That was months ago, and so far the blue prints bug has not yet bitten...

 

[Raghu Kuvempunagar]

Is this different from "New Cyanotype?"

Mike Ware's Simple Cyanotype is a more recent innovation than New Cyanotype and uses Ferric Ammonium Citrate instead of Ferric Ammonium Oxalate. However, unlike Classic Cyanotype that uses commercial FAC, it synthesises FAC from Ferric Nitrate, Citric Acid and Ammonia. This is desirable as commercial FAC comes in varying composition and is not consistent in behaviour across manufacturing processes. Apart from using less toxic ingredients, Simple Cyanotype sensitiser can be made in different contrast grades unlike New Cyanotype. The exposed print can be developed in Citric Acid bath unlike New Cyanotype which requires a mineral acid. Simple Cyanotype is relatively less fussy with the choice of paper. So there're definite practical advantages of using Simple Cyanotype over New Cyanotype.

What you see in the video and subsequent discussion are ways of making Simple Cyanotype sensitiser without actually using Ammonia directly.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

@Raghu Kuvempunagar what was the density range of the negative used for the bottle? Was the Canson Montval acidified first before coating it with Ammonium Chloride solution? And finally, did you tone right after development (and rinsing/washing)? Thanks!

 

[Raghu Kuvempunagar]

@Raghu Kuvempunagar what was the density range of the negative used for the bottle? Was the Canson Montval acidified first before coating it with Ammonium Chloride solution? And finally, did you tone right after development (and rinsing/washing)? Thanks!

Andrew, should be 1.8-2.1. I got this negative printed with a bunch of others on a Laser Printer from a printing shop. I had low expectations initially but this seems to be a more capable printer than run of the mill laser printers and the negatives seem to work alright.

No, I didn't acidify this 185 gsm Canson Montval paper, only Ammonium Chloride coating. Being a low weight paper, it is not heavily buffered.

Yes, I toned right after development (rinsed and washed).

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

@Raghu Kuvempunagar thank you!

 

[Ben 4]

Nice demonstration—was that a 6x7 neg in the first prints?

 

[BHuij]

Mike Ware's Simple Cyanotype is a more recent innovation than New Cyanotype and uses Ferric Ammonium Citrate instead of Ferric Ammonium Oxalate. However, unlike Classic Cyanotype that uses commercial FAC, it synthesises FAC from Ferric Nitrate, Citric Acid and Ammonia. This is desirable as commercial FAC comes in varying composition and is not consistent in behaviour across manufacturing processes. Apart from using less toxic ingredients, Simple Cyanotype sensitiser can be made in different contrast grades unlike New Cyanotype. The exposed print can be developed in Citric Acid bath unlike New Cyanotype which requires a mineral acid. Simple Cyanotype is relatively less fussy with the choice of paper. So there're definite practical advantages of using Simple Cyanotype over New Cyanotype.

What you see in the video and subsequent discussion are ways of making Simple Cyanotype sensitiser without actually using Ammonia directly.

This is fascinating, thank you for the rundown!

I spent a frustrating few months tinkering with New Cyanotype's apparent contrast controls (addition of citric acid) to see if I could match the tonal scale required by a sensitized piece of HPR to my existing well-tuned Kallitype inkjet negs. While I had the occasional success, I was ultimately so off-put by the inconsistency of my results that I abandoned the process altogether. Not only did the sensitizer seem to disagree with HPR, I also found that adding citric acid to reduce contrast was mostly just reducing Dmax.

The idea of having a low-contrast sensiziter and a high-contrast sensitizer that can be mixed in various proportions to work with various negatives is compelling. It's essentially the same mechanism by which VC silver gelatin printing works, just with a more manual method of adjusting the balance than changing light color. I wonder if going back to FAC instead of New Cyanotype's FAO would make any difference in how nicely the process plays with HPR.

 

[Raghu Kuvempunagar]

You're right. Thanks for the correction.

Today I tried the following synthesis process for Simple Cyanotype high contrast version:

Solution A
Water: 25 ml
Citric Acid (anhydrous) : 12 g (Equivalently, Citric Acid monohydrate 13 g)
Ferric Nitrate (nonahydrate): 12 g

Solution B
Water: 50 ml
Ammonium Carbonate: 14 g

Add solution B slowly to solution A and stir well. Will fizz.
Top it to 100 ml.

pH ~ 7.5

I could have added more Ammonium Carbonate to get pH to ~8 but stopped.

I used 2 ml of this and 0.2 g of Potassium Ferricyanide to coat a A4 sized Canson Montval 185 gsm cold pressed paper that had been coated earlier with 5 ml of 10% Ammonium Chloride solution. The resulting FerroBlend print had nice split-tone effect. I toned the print with the following toner:

Water: 200 ml
Copper Sulphate: 2.5 g
Ammonium Carbonate: 5 g

Used about 25 ml of the toner for toning the print (about two minutes). Blue shifted towards black and highlights brightened a bit. The toned FerroBlend print looks good to me. Will post the print pic tomorrow.

I now have a few 8x10 sheets of Revere Platinum. I made a FerroBlend print using this sensitiser. As before I gave the sheet a coating of Ammonium Chloride before sensitising it. No acidification needed as this paper doesn't have calcium carbonate. The paper worked well without any problem producing split-tone effect with warm highlights. A little too warm for my tastes especially after toning with the the above described toner. Next time I'll cut down the amount of Ammonium Chloride used.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Yes, Revere Platinum gives a much warmer tone in the high lights.

 

[PGum]

Have any of you tried toning the cuprotype with tannin based toners?

 

[Raghu Kuvempunagar]

Have any of you tried toning the cuprotype with tannin based toners?

I have tried toning Copper Thiocyanate print with Catechol + PPD. I didn't like the results.

FWIW the only toner I liked for Copper Thiocyanate prints was Silver Nitrate and when it worked well it produced lovely light pink highlights and reddish brown shadows. Alkaline Thiourea also gave nice results but the prints deteriorated over time.

 

[F4U]

My question concerning the making of digital negatives on an inkjet or laserjet, is that those machines use dots for the haltones, unlike film, which is truly continuous or graduated tone. Further, none of those toners are capable of much density at all when held up to the light. And most notably, even the finest laserjet can only give a 133 line screen, at best on smooth or coated stock. Given all that, isn't the final cyanotype print still a dot print just like any other halftone in a newspaper?

 

[gbroadbridge]

My question concerning the making of digital negatives on an inkjet or laserjet, is that those machines use dots for the haltones, unlike film, which is truly continuous or graduated tone. Further, none of those toners are capable of much density at all when held up to the light. And most notably, even the finest laserjet can only give a 133 line screen, at best on smooth or coated stock. Given all that, isn't the final cyanotype print still a dot print just like any other halftone in a newspaper?

If you look at an inkjet photo print do you see dots?

 

[F4U]

I must say, you guys are doing some remarkable work, for having no commercially made conventional silver process print paper involved. We've lived under the spectre of the day when the last company making the conventional products will shut its doors, and only these alternative processes remain. Gratifying to see that if that dreaded day comes in my lifetime, that the work you seem to be doing can make a worthy and polished replacement. Thank you.