Palladium/Na2 Print comes out gray

Minas Stratigos · Apr 26, 2020

Hi, I hope you are all doing well these difficult days...

Back to darkroom after 2 months and I get this strange dark gray color, even at the masked area (I print with a black border on my negatives for clean prints) with a black border. The first time I thought is my FO so I made a new bottle and tried again (I buy B&S pre-measured and I just add water). Second print exactly the same.

Can it be the Pd or NA2? Can the brush be contaminated with something?

The mix is 8 drops FO, 8 drops Pd, 1drop Na2 @ 1% for a 6x8inches print.
Developer is PO, paper is Bergger COT 160.

The print was less contrasty than the image i upload here.

Let me know your thoughts.

Minas

Alan9940 · Apr 26, 2020

The print doesn't look that bad to me, but your Na2 seems very low for a 6x8 print. For example, for a 5x7 on Hahnemuhle Platinum Rag my mix is:

10 drops FO #1
10 drops Palladium #3
4 drops Na2 5%
1 drop Tween 20 10%

I develop in PO at about 110F. Digital negative.

Minas Stratigos · Apr 26, 2020

Alan9940 said:
The print doesn't look that bad to me, but your Na2 seems very low for a 6x8 print. For example, for a 5x7 on Hahnemuhle Platinum Rag my mix is:

10 drops FO #1
10 drops Palladium #3
4 drops Na2 5%
1 drop Tween 20 10%

I develop in PO at about 110F. Digital negative.

Thanks for your reply, my mix is calibrated with such little Na2 and is working the last 12 months with very good prints. Notice where the red arrow is, it should be white paper there as my negative has a black frame for a clean print

jeffreyg · Apr 26, 2020

I print pt/pd not Na2 but I use FeO #1 plus 1 or 2 drops of Feo #2 and 4drops H2O2 to boost contrast. I would call Bostick and Sullivan. I have always found them helpful. I also don't use the COT paper but when I used it I recall it had a white base as opposed to natural white. I'm using Arches Platine which is not bright white. Of course it all depends on the contrast of the negative . I like the slightly warmer look but that is personal preference. My supplies also come from Bostick and Sullivan.

http://www.jeffreyglasser.com/

http://www.sculptureandphotography.com/

dasBlute · Apr 26, 2020

Minas Stratigos said:
Thanks for your reply, my mix is calibrated with such little Na2 and is working the last 12 months with very good prints. Notice where the red arrow is, it should be white paper there as my negative has a black frame for a clean print

View attachment 244726

That would suggest "fogging", how fresh is your ferric oxalate? From the Arentz book:
"Fogging can be due to too much UV light in the coating area or too high concentration of ferrous oxalate in you sensitizer."

Minas Stratigos · Apr 26, 2020

dasBlute said:
That would suggest "fogging", how fresh is your ferric oxalate? From the Arentz book:
"Fogging can be due to too much UV light in the coating area or too high concentration of ferrous oxalate in you sensitizer."

My FO was 6 months old, the moment I saw this print immediately I mixed a new batch of FO and tried again, same result :-(

jeffreyg · Apr 26, 2020

Try making a mask, put the print in the developer face down and lightly hose off the print before clearing. I had a similar problem thinking that the black negative would give a clean border but really wasn't. I don't think it's your FO. I like to see the brush marks but I was printing for someone else who wanted clean borders.

dasBlute · Apr 26, 2020

Minas Stratigos said:
My FO was 6 months old, the moment I saw this print immediately I mixed a new batch of FO and tried again, same result :-(

If your coating room/method hasn't changed, then how about the brush?

Minas Stratigos · Apr 26, 2020

UPDATE: Problem solved. I print Negatives with P600, recently I switched to Matte Black for a few prints and then back to Photo black for Negatives. Probably there was some matte black in the pipes when I printed this negative yesterday. Below a test I did with the same neg U used earlier and an older neg, the black frame comes very well at the older neg side.

thanks for your input.

Minas

nmp · Apr 26, 2020

Minas Stratigos said:
UPDATE: Problem solved. I print Negatives with P600, recently I switched to Matte Black for a few prints and then back to Photo black for Negatives. Probably there was some matte black in the pipes when I printed this negative yesterday. Below a test I did with the same neg U used earlier and an older neg, the black frame comes very well at the older neg side.

thanks for your input.

Minas

View attachment 244732

Interesting...usually the MK has higher UV density than the PK. So if there was MK contamination in PK, it would theoretically result in opposite of what you saw. Are you using a colorized negative? Any chance one of the other ink-channels being clogged? Did you do the nozzle check before printing the last negatives?

:Niranjan.

Minas Stratigos · Apr 26, 2020

nmp said:
Interesting...usually the MK has higher UV density than the PK. So if there was MK contamination in PK, it would theoretically result in opposite of what you saw. Are you using a colorized negative? Any chance one of the other ink-channels being clogged? Did you do the nozzle check before printing the last negatives?

:Niranjan.

I print with Qtrip and a curve that uses multiple inks. I did a nozzle check a couple of days ago, with MK, I forgot to make one when I switched back to PK. I did many head cleans now and printing the negative again

Alan9940 · Apr 26, 2020

Sounds like you might be hot on to a solution...good luck!

I always use PK when printing my digital negs on Pictorico OHP on an Epson R2880. But, since I like having the brush marks, I print with clear borders which doesn't help you at all. These issues can be a pain to figure out, but keep at it and let us know the solution.

nmp · Apr 26, 2020

Minas Stratigos said:
I print with Qtrip and a curve that uses multiple inks. I did a nozzle check a couple of days ago, with MK, I forgot to make one when I switched back to PK. I did many head cleans now and printing the negative again

MK/PK change is a pain, that's why I bought the P400, but then its inks are not as dense as P600. Looks like there is a successor to P600 (P700) where they have dedicated channels for the two blacks. I have had similar problems when one of the nozzle is not firing 100% (like the Y or C), looking at the negative you can't tell at all but when printed the opacity has changed just enough to make a big difference in the print density.

Anyway, looks like you have a handle of the situation...

:Niranjan.

Minas Stratigos · Apr 27, 2020

Just finished the print, not completely dry, Developer around 29 degrees C, its softer than it should be but looks really good.

nmp · Apr 27, 2020

Minas Stratigos said:
Just finished the print, not completely dry, Developer around 29 degrees C, its softer than it should be but looks really good.

View attachment 244851

Well done....don't you like it when problem gets solved without a trip to the proverbial rabbit-hole.

Lovely image - what is it, a tree trunk?

Minas Stratigos · Apr 27, 2020

nmp said:
Well done....don't you like it when problem gets solved without a trip to the proverbial rabbit-hole.

Lovely image - what is it, a tree trunk?

Haha, of course

It's a close up of a tree trunk I found at a beach few years ago.

Palladium/Na2 Print comes out gray

Attachments

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency