Most fool proof pl/pd paper

[dpurdy]

I have just agreed to a large job of printing a stack of antique glass plates in pl/pd. It is across country from me and needs to be done in 4 days printing. My biggest concern is with the paper I use. I have for years printed on Cranes 90lb cover but that paper is persnikety. Sometimes it is fine and sometimes I get mottling in the light tones. I am happy to jump through hoops here at home with my work but it would be a nightmare to get to this job and have technical problems with the paper. I am wondering if there is a paper that might be fool proof even if I have to pay extra for it. I have tried Arches Platine and had grainy problems with it. I have never tried that cot-320 paper. If I use a mixture of 10 to 15% platinum and do contrast with either part B or with Na2 platinum, is the COT-320 as fool proof a paper as i can get.. for mottling and d-max and clearing speed?

I know this has been discussed a million times already and my apologies for that.

Dennis Purdy

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

My recommendation would be for the NA2 for contrasting and COT320 for the paper. This is about as foolproof a combo as you can get. All the Pt/Pd work posted in my gallery was done on COT320, and in most cases, no contrasting agent was needed. With those old glass plates you may or may not need any contrasting agent- often glass plates are quite contrasty, and have a very high density range.

 

[sly]

I am going to have to look for some of that Cot320. I have an image I've been working on that is quite high key, and I'm about ready to give up on it because of the mottling, striping, and blobbing I've been getting on Stonehenge. Hope it is available in my small burgh. Sly

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

Your best bet is to just call up Bostick & Sullivan and order it from them. Also, ask them about a paper sampler kit, if you have time. They have a very nice paper sampler kit with a few sheets of a half-dozen types of paper. It would give you a chance to try a variety of papers that way, and you could see what works for you.

 

[dpurdy]

I don't have enough time to do a lot of testing so I guess I will get a bunch of the COT320 and if I don't use it I will try to sell it in here.

thanks for the advice.
Dennis

 

[sly]

buying from the states

Your best bet is to just call up Bostick & Sullivan and order it from them. Also, ask them about a paper sampler kit, if you have time. They have a very nice paper sampler kit with a few sheets of a half-dozen types of paper. It would give you a chance to try a variety of papers that way, and you could see what works for you.

The last time I ordered fronm the states (and I have ordered from B&S before). It cost almost as much to get the item here as it did to buy it. Buying pricey items like pl/pt chemicals it is a much smaller percentage, but things under or around $100 just kill me with shipping and customs. I will look into that if I can't find a Canadian distributor. Sly

 

[photomc]

I am going to have to look for some of that Cot320. I have an image I've been working on that is quite high key, and I'm about ready to give up on it because of the mottling, striping, and blobbing I've been getting on Stonehenge. Hope it is available in my small burgh. Sly

Sly, if COT320 turns out a bit to pricey you might look to see if you can source some Arches Platine (very close to COT320) or some Fabriano Artistico Extra White (FAEW does require a short bath in oxalic acid to use for plt/pld). In fact you might try giving the Stonehenge a 5 min bath in OA just to see if it helps (1-2% oxalic acid or 1 to 2 teaspoon in 1 liter of water, soak for about 5 min and dry).

If those options do not work, check some of the papers listed in Dick Arentz Platinum & Palladium book - he list a number of papers that might be easier for you to source.

Good Luck and enjoy.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

Unfortunately the Stonehenge is no longer available.

I'd try the Platine or the Fabriano as alternatives to the COT if you can get them locally. My first preference though is still the COT.

 

[Jim Noel]

I don't think this is the time to be experimenting with paper. Use what you are most familiar with.

 

[photomc]

Apologies to the OP, for the slight off topic reply to SLY. Jim is correct, with a job like you describe Dennis, best to go with what you know IMO.

Good Luck, let us know what paper you end up using and how the job goes (ok, just my own curiosity to hear how a print job like that goes).

 

[CarlRadford]

Are you in the UK?

try: http://www.linhofstudio.com/products/fineart/papers.html

The last time I ordered fronm the states (and I have ordered from B&S before). It cost almost as much to get the item here as it did to buy it. Buying pricey items like pl/pt chemicals it is a much smaller percentage, but things under or around $100 just kill me with shipping and customs. I will look into that if I can't find a Canadian distributor. Sly

 

[RobertP]

If those glass plates were shot with albumen in mind they may be to dense for platinum.

 

[Loris Medici]

If those glass plates were shot with albumen in mind they may be to dense for platinum.

You may be right for DOP Pt/Pd... On the other hand, they may turn out to be perfect for POP Pd; my usual POP Pd sensitizer requires a DR around log 2.9.

Regards,
Loris.

 

[dpurdy]

I have only one experience with printing glass plates and they were from the early 20th century. They printed just fine on ilford VC paper but you are making me a bit nervous about these as they might be a bit older than that.

As to sticking with my standard paper, I have cursed my standard paper 1001 times for mottling and sometimes lacking in dmax. It can be good and work great in every way then go to complete barnyard manure for no apparent reason. Though I think it is all in the humidity and heat. Fortunately or unfortunately I have nearly 850 sheets 11x14 on hand of that paper so I continue to be committed to it for my own work.

However I am going to have to pack up and ship my entire operation from west coast to east coast and hope to print some 20 glass plates in 4 days. If I run into the standard BS my paper is capable of dealing me I will be in big trouble. So if some paper seems to be immune to inexplicable mottling and graininess I will get some of it and take it along. Generally COT-320 is too expensive for me but if that is the most consistantly trouble free paper I will try it.

thanks for the input and any further info about printing glass plates would be welcome.
Dennis Purdy

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

The biggest source of mottling/grain in pt/pd I found was in using the FeOx#2 as a contrasting agent. I have not found it to be a paper-related issue. Given the probability that these old glass plates are dense and contrasty, I wouldn't be too worried about how much if any contrasting agent you have, and just get a good consistent paper. I think the COT 320 is the paper most likely to deliver that consistency for you, even though it is pricey. Also, if you're going to be on the east coast in the next few weeks, humidity control is not going to be a problem- this is swamp season. In the winter, my printing times drop to something on the order of 20+ minutes per print. Now? same lighting setup, same chemistry - 6 - 6.5 minutes.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

It has been brought to my attention that mis-information has been posted to this thread, by myself. It is possible for paper to be a cause mottling, if the paper pH is not in proper balance, and an Oxalic Acid bath may be desireable to rebalance the paper. I was speaking only from my own experience, which is with a narrow selection of papers, apparently none of which so far have a pH issue. Please search these forums for more specific information as to which papers require an acid pre-bath.

 

[Alan9940]

Like "FlyingCamera" I, too, would recommend NA2 (contrast agent) and COT-320 paper. In the past I've also used Crane's Platinotype without problems, but I think it has been replaced; haven't used the newer version. Also, I'd highly recommend a Richersen (sp?) "magic brush" for coating. I used one of these for the first time at a Dick Artenz / Mark Nelsen workshop and it was very nice!

Good luck...

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

I'll put in yet another recommendation for the Richeson 9010 "Magic" brush. The bristles are brilliant; the rest of the brush is cheap. If a Richeson is out of your price range, if you have an Utrecht art supply store near you, Utrecht sells a house-label watercolor wash brush with big fat clear acrylic handles that comes within reasonable distance of the Richeson, for a lot less money.

http://www.utrechtart.com/dsp_view_...ubclassID=121112&brandname=Utrecht&item=32245

The downside is that this brush only comes as wide as 1 1/2 inches. That's fine for coating 5x7 and smaller, but for bigger prints it gets a bit tedious.

 

[scootermm]

justy another suggestion to consider
the mottling mentioned could be coming from the PH of the paper.
Fabriano Artistico Extra White and Rives BFK need a prebath. Ive found the more recent batches of Fabriano Ive bought require a strong prebath... in the range of 5-8% baths for about 10mins.

Not sure if this will carry over with other paper types... but the possibility exists.

hope that helps in the mottling issue.

 

[photomc]

Matt brings up an important factor about the prebath...you will need to find which paper works and how much oxalic acid is needed. I tend to not measure out the OA when mixing, but do watch to see when the paper stops reacting (the little bubbles slow down - I know not real technical).

Also, additional info I found elsewhere about Stonehenge - it appears that Dead Link Removed company bought the Rising Mill and are continuing mfg of the paper. Just checked the Legion website and they do list Stonehenge as one of their papers. (in case anyone wanted to know - I would be curious if anyone has more recent info on this)

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

Mike-

that would be great news if it is true. Stonehenge was one of the easier papers to work with for pt/pd, although I didn't like the tint it gave to prints I made on it that had contrasting agent used - they looked like a warmtone silver paper developed in dektol, replete with that greenish tinge.

 

[Monophoto]

While I appreciate Mike's news about Stonehenge, I think we need to be very careful before starting a celebration.

The actual words in the press release say: "Legion Paper, the leading supplier of fine art paper in North America, acquired the Rising and Stonehenge brands upon Neenah Paper’s announcement of the Rising Mill closure. Legion Paper will continue to supply the papers to the exact specifications to the worldwide community."

In other words, Legion bought the Stonehenge BRAND, and have announced that they will try to duplicate the paper in a some other mill. Legion did not buy the old Rising mill in Great Barrington, nor will the new Stonehenge papers be made by the same people who made the old stuff.

We need to test the new paper before assuming that it will respond the same for Pt/Pd printing.

Incidentally, it is still possible to find Rising Stonehenge if you look carefully. I saw some in Pearl in NYC several months ago, and I saw some in an art supply shop in Bennington, VT just this afternoon.

 

[photomc]

Louie, I agree with your comments. One possible hope that it is the same is that on the Legion website they list the Rising mill as one of their facilities. Still, does not mean it is the same paper, but it hopefully means that the some of the employees were able to keep their jobs, which might mean the paper is close to the original.

 

[Monophoto]

Mike - aLegion does not own any mills, nor they do actually manufacture any papers. Instead, they are a wholesale distributor of papers. I think what they are listing on their web site are the brands that they represent.

In fact, some of the press releases indicate that Legion has been the distributor for the art papers produced by Neenah (the company that has been operating the mill and producing Rising and Stonehenge products) all along, and it appears that what has happened now is that Legion now has exclusive ownership of the Rising and Stonehenge brands and will be contracting some other manufacturer to produce papers that meet the traditional specifications.

The Housatonic mill is not far from here, and it's closing has been covered extensively in our local news. In fact, in early June (the deal between Legion and Neenah was done in April), the local news was not only that all of the employees at the mill were going to be laid off, but there was some kind of legal machination that was causing a number of them to lose their severance benefits. The State of Massachusetts was attempting to intervene, blah, blah, blah.

 

[photomc]

Thanks for the update Louie - how does the saying go 'I hope for the best, but expect the worst' when it comes to these types of deals. The employees are the asset that seems to get lost, and often times the quality of the product drops to a level that it is a shame to have the same name of a once sold product.