New B&W 'Zine...? & Updates..

[vickersdc]

Thanks pesphoto - what kind of klutz am I? (Don't answer that one!).

 

[Fotohuis]

I won't answer it: Sometimes you get crazy from all that links, websites and HTML programming. Be creative and shoot on FILM.

Additional info for Mark's Antony coffee developer article:

Because this is a low contrast developer the stuff is also suitable for developing the Technical Pan ATP-V1.1 film from Rollei.

But just for fun. Best overall results you will have with the R.L.C. or the Moersch (UGI) or SPUR Technospeed developer (on higher iso rates).
A third alternative is the high dilution Rodinal trick :munch:

To support your new analog virtual magazine our Fotohuis will send a small price to the winner of the photo competition.

End date 30 March 2008.

Best regards and succes with your new magazine!

Robert

 

[vickersdc]

@Fotohuis:

Thanks for the information about development... and a big thank you for the offer of a prize for the competition. I'll send you a PM and we can work something out.

Many thanks,
David Vickers.

 

[Christopher Walrath]

Off to a smashing start, David. Oodles of approval from this corner of the internet.

 

[vickersdc]

Well, we are now one week old and what a success it's been! Thank you all for your support and coming to visit the site at Dead Link Removed.

There's been a marvellous response and it's been great receiving your mails, with the vast majority seeming to like the new site.

So, how well have we done? Well, in the first seven days there's been just over 750 visits and an amazing 3,615 page views (now, that can't have all been down to my wife). Actually, my wife has still to visit the site so she's still a little perplexed about what it is that takes up my spare time!

There's a new article going up tomorrow (Tuesday 22nd January) which I think you'll find really interesting - more about that later on.

The build of version 2.0 of the site continues apace and I had a bit of a breakthrough over the weekend with how articles will be displayed - nothing fancy, I just wanted a particular look and neat coding! So far, the article archive has been sorted out, as has the competition page, the gallery and featured images - I reckon another couple of weeks should see the new, new site completed and ready for switchover.

Again, thank you for the support you have shown - keep popping by to check out the latest articles and images.

Cheers,
David Vickers.

 

[vickersdc]

Article On Platinum / Palladium Printing

This weeks (and next weeks come to think of it) article in the Creative Image Maker online magazine is all about platinum / palladium printing and has been written by Scott Davis, whom some of you may know from here on the APUG forum.

The article shows you all you need to know to get started with this form of printing and takes a look at the equipment and chemicals that you'll need, the preparation required and how to go about actually printing your first platinum / palladium print as well as some troubleshooting hints and tips.

I've decided to split the article up over two weeks - the first week, starting on the 22nd January, looks at the history of this method, the equipment needed and the preparation. Next week (29th January) picks up from where we left off and sets out to show you how to actually make your first print.

I hope you enjoy it, and a massive "Thank you" to Scott for all his efforts in putting together this article with it's step-by-step images to help you along the way.

The article can be found at Dead Link Removed.

David Vickers.

 

[Renato Tonelli]

Thank you for posting this. I got a real kick at the handmade 5x4 camera.
I had made a pinhole camera for use with a Polaroid holder with my daughter many years ago for a school project. Her teacher lost the camera and I have wanting to make a new one ever since, but this time with the option of using a lens.

 

[vickersdc]

Thank you for posting this. I got a real kick at the handmade 5x4 camera.
I had made a pinhole camera for use with a Polaroid holder with my daughter many years ago for a school project. Her teacher lost the camera and I have wanting to make a new one ever since, but this time with the option of using a lens.

Well, if you get around to making another one (or the Neretta) let me know and we can post some pictures!

Cheers,
David.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

David- I want to thank you for the opportunity to write something for your new journal. I hope this article will be a help to launching your endeavor successfully. I must say I'm truly impressed with the layout and design overall. If the web presence looks this good, I can't wait to order a hard copy of the completed first quarter!

 

[Christopher Walrath]

Thank for the update, David. Keep us informed. Cheers, Mate.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

David- I just saw my article, and I'm very impressed with your layout. You make me look like a pro! Again, congrats on a successful launch to the magazine.

 

[vickersdc]

Scott, if I made you look like a pro with just part one - imagine how cool you'll look when part two goes online next week ;-)

 

[vickersdc]

Part 2 of Scott's article on platinum / palladium printing...

Just a quick note to let you all know that the second part to Scott Davis's article on platinum / palladium printing is now available at Dead Link Removed.

For those of you that managed to pop by and take a peek at Part One last week, you'll know that we've got as far as sorting out all the preparation. This week - we take it from exposing the print to the final image.

Cheers,
David Vickers.

 

[dpurdy]

I enjoyed reading the writing and it makes me want to get going on another printing session. It brings to mind a couple of questions but one interesting thing I find different from my printing experience is that you, Scott, say that your prints dry up. That is opposite to my prints which dry very much darker. I have a really hard time printing light enough that the prints don't dry down too dark. I wonder how to account for the difference in our process. I wonder if it is paper characteristics. I use the Crane's 90 lb ( still have 800 sheets from B&S) and you use the COT paper. Would you say that is the reason for the difference?

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

The paper may account for it, but it is a generally considered characteristic of pt/pd prints that they dry "up", if for no other reason than the 'dulling' effect of the difference between wet and dry prints. That result of the profound dry-down is unusual - I've not found a radical shift one direction or the other with pt/pd, but most of the time it has been mild to observable drying "up".

I used some of the Cranes 90# when I first started learning, and I didn't like the wet strength at all. Part of the problem was at the time, I was coating with a cheap foam brush from the hardware store, which was tearing up my paper as I was coating. That aside, I didn't like the watermark, or the base color either. I've not experimented much with different papers, so I'd refer you to some of our other printers here who have tried a wider range of surfaces. I've printed on the heavy-weight Gampi paper, which has a very nice look/feel, the Soccoro(sp?) which doesn't exist anymore (that would have been my #2 paper choice were it still around), and I have some other papers to experiment with. I know it isn't difficult to try some of the other papers, even the ones that need the acid pre-soak, but I've been working with limited darkroom time and production deadlines, so I've stuck with the paper I know best and works easiest for me. I don't think there's anyone here who will say you'll go wrong with the COT320 - they may have different preferences for one reason or another, but it's a great paper.

 

[johnnywalker]

Very well done Scott and David. The article is well-written, and laid out and illustrated very nicely.

 

[dpurdy]

I wonder if there is a confusion about the Crane's 90lb cover, platinotype. It has never had a watermark and the wet strength is very good. I wonder if you are talking about another Crane's paper that I can't think what it is called is a writing paper that a lot of people have used for platinum printing that does have a water mark and is a problem when wet. I have some Cot 320 on hand though I have never tried it. I am about to start printing so I will see if it dries up or down for me. I am curious if other people have their prints dry up. I have only heard of them drying down.. way down.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

Yes- the stuff I used and platinotype are two different papers.

 

[vickersdc]

Very well done Scott and David. The article is well-written, and laid out and illustrated very nicely.

Thank you for the kind comments johnnywalker, the real thanks go to Scott who took a lot of time and trouble to take the images and get all the text down despite having several other pressures on him!

For the others:

I hope you all enjoyed the articles, let me know how you get on if you go back and give the printing a go. I'm keen to do a follow up article in a couple of months time (I shall be doing one following the developing in coffee article thanks to the interest that created), and so it might be fun to do the same with this?

Cheers,
David.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

I would be very interested to hear what success/difficulties others encounter with my method. There's a thousand and one ways to approach printing in pt/pd, all of which have their own ups and downs. What works for one will be an unmitigated disaster for another. If my working method works for you, please let me know, and keep using it. If it doesn't work for you, also pass along what didn't work. I'm looking forward to helping folks solve problems, and if someone can show me an improvement to my method, I'm all in favor of learning another way.

 

[scootermm]

I read through the article which seemed very descriptive but since you asked for feedback scott ... I wanted to comment on something in particular, only because I dealt with the same "math" problem recently.

When you are starting out, it would be a good idea to get some additional shot glasses, and mark them with the percentage dilution they will contain. The stock solution you get when you buy it is a 20% solution. Mark your shot glasses as 10%, 5%, 2.5% and 1.25%. Put one drop of NA2 in each glass. Using a different dropper, add 1 drop distilled water to the 10% glass, 2 drops to the 5%, three drops to the 2.5% and so on. If you need that much contrast, you can always pull the 20% direct from the bottle. You will find with use and practice that good negatives require very little contrast agent to make a good print, and that a very little contrast agent goes a very long way.

With my example print here, I am adding 1 drop of 2.5% NA2.

your dilutions are incorrect Scott.

you mention putting 1 drop of 20% in each shot glass that are marked 10%, 5%, 2.5%, 1.25%. and then sequentially adding 1 drop, 2 drops, 3 drops etc of dist water.

My understanding for the correct manner to dilute is as follows:

10%solution:
add 1 drop of distilled water to the 1 drop of 20% solution = 2 drops of 10% solution

5% solution:
add 3 drops of distilled to 1 drop of 20%= 4 drops of 5%

2.5% solution:
add 7 drops of distilled to 1 drop of 20% = 8 drops of 2.5%

1.25% solution:
add 15 drops of distilled to 1 drop of 20% = 16 drops of 2.5%

you have to double your total quantities, it is an exponential relationship not just an adding relations... not just add one drop to get different dilutions.

I went through a similar process although I am taking small bottles and making up solutions and storing each of my dilutions in seperate bottles marked 10%, 5%, 2.5%

10% solution:
5ml of 20% Na2 added to 5ml dist water = 10ml of 10% Na2

5% solution:
5ml of 20% Na2 added to 15ml dist water = 20ml of 5% Na2

2.5% Solution:
5ml of Na2 added to 35ml of dist water = 40ml of 2.5% Na2

Others can comment on this, or correct me, but Im pretty sure as I made a mistake at first and was corrected (by Kerik).

When people are taking notes about their prints using your calculations theyd actually not be listing the correct %Na2 drop.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

Matt - I think you are absolutely correct about the math. I'll ask David to publish a correction with the drop counts amended.

 

[vickersdc]

The errant article has been corrected! Thank you scootermm.

 

[Kerik]

When I teach I find it easier for people to grasp this (nearly) math-free approach:

Starting with a 10 ml bottle of 20% Na2 solution and a total of 4 dropper bottles:

Take 5 ml 20% and dilute it with 5 ml distilled water = 10 ml of 10%
Take 4 ml of the 10% and dilute with 4 ml water = 8 ml of 5%
Take 3 ml of the 5% and dilute with 3 ml water = 6 ml of 2.5%

You end up with 5 ml 20%, 6 ml 10%, 5 ml 5% and 6 ml 2.5%

I've not found a use for lower concentrations than 2.5%, but I rarely print smaller than 8x10 and most often I'm printing considerably larger.

Dead Link Removed and Dead Link Removed make these measurements easy and accurate. They are also much more convenient for measuring your pd and ferric when you're printing large. Counting 60 drops of anything really sucks. I like these pipettes because they are plastic and nearly unbreakable while the glass variety are easily broken.

 

[Kerik]

..