Photo paper as cyanotype substrate

[Whiteymorange]

I have been experimenting with fixed out photo paper as a substrate for cyanotype, figuring that the gelatin coating might be perfect for the process. Some success, some failures. Mostly I find that matt or pearl surfaces are better, but not always. The paper brand/type is also important, but I haven't done enough yet to have a good handle on what to avoid. I've attached two examples, one is a Bergger matt surface from the 90's, the other, the funky one, is an Ilford gloss that was given to me as scrap in 16x20 size, with the outer wrapping missing, so I can't tell you the exact type. That one was coated with a glass rod. The coating errors give it a unique look, which I quite like, but I would love to find a way to coat it evenly, since the gloss surface allows very sharp renditions, which might be useful for certain images.

So here is the question: has anyone tried silkscreen coating the cyanotype chemicals on to paper or cloth? A very tight screen and hard, sharp squeegee might be fine for such thin "ink" or, as an alternative, there may be some way to render the cyanotype chemicals more viscous.

 

[nmp]

Have you looked at this work?

http://www.craigkoshykphoto.ca/vouloir-pouvoir.pdf
Mod edit: new link to replace the broken one above: https://dogwilling.ca/s/vouloir-pouvoir.pdf

 

[Jerevan]

I think the cyanotype chemistry needs to have something to hold onto - and in that case you are going to have better success with the matt/pearl papers. Interesting idea though about the silkscreen, could get you some sort of newspaper graphic style image - maybe this could work on cloth too?

 

[jim10219]

I did silk screen printing professionally for about 6 years. I wouldn't even attempt it with cyanotype. The emulsion is too thin and would just drip through the silk screen. The inks they use are thick and viscous.

I would think that if you're looking for a way to evenly coat the paper, maybe soak the paper face down in a tray and run it through a roller to roll off the excess? For me, the glass rod method works well enough, so that's what I use.

If you're looking for a paper that takes cyanotype formula really well and prints with lots of detail, try inkjet printer paper. It has a special coating made to absorb the inks evenly that also works very well with cyanotypes. The downside is, it's hard finding papers that are very thick. So you usually cant get them wet twice, which makes toning really difficult.

 

[glbeas]

Half a century ago when I was working at the local newspaper we bought our plates uncoated and used a double roller with a shallow tray under the bottom roller to hold the diazo coating which resembled yellow orange koolaide. I have a crank type roller squeegee that mounts on the wall that looks very similar. If you found something like that and was able to rig a reservoir tray to it you could coat very quickly and evenly depending on the quality of the roller set.

 

[removed account4]

Have you looked at this work?

http://www.craigkoshykphoto.ca/vouloir-pouvoir.pdf

+1!!
Craig's book is an invaluable resource !
Good luck with your experiments Whitey !
John

 

[BJ68]

I have been experimenting with fixed out photo paper as a substrate for cyanotype, figuring that the gelatin coating might be perfect for the process. Some success, some failures.

Half OT:

https://www.keh.com/blog/experimenting-with-cyanotype-on-photo-paper/

This guy used photo inkjet paper for it...I tried it, too and it worked nicely.

bj68

 

[Jerevan]

As often, there is always something new to see and learn ... had missed out on that book - great resource!

I wonder if the Adox Art Baryta paper might work for this purpose?

 

[Rick A]

I have been experimenting with fixed out photo paper as a substrate for cyanotype, figuring that the gelatin coating might be perfect for the process. Some success, some failures. Mostly I find that matt or pearl surfaces are better, but not always. The paper brand/type is also important, but I haven't done enough yet to have a good handle on what to avoid. I've attached two examples, one is a Bergger matt surface from the 90's, the other, the funky one, is an Ilford gloss that was given to me as scrap in 16x20 size, with the outer wrapping missing, so I can't tell you the exact type. That one was coated with a glass rod. The coating errors give it a unique look, which I quite like, but I would love to find a way to coat it evenly, since the gloss surface allows very sharp renditions, which might be useful for certain images.

So here is the question: has anyone tried silkscreen coating the cyanotype chemicals on to paper or cloth? A very tight screen and hard, sharp squeegee might be fine for such thin "ink" or, as an alternative, there may be some way to render the cyanotype chemicals more viscous. View attachment 220003 View attachment 220004

Try flipping the paper over and coating the backside, the cyanotype solution needs to soak into the substrate just a bit, it's not a true surface coating like photo emulsion. That's why it adheres to the pearl surface better than glossy.

 

[lantau]

I have a box of Adox Baryta inkjet paper. I thought I'd use it with a printer at work, but we don't have that any longer. The inkjet layer on top of the Baryta should take up the solution, shouldn't it?

 

[nmp]

I have a box of Adox Baryta inkjet paper. I thought I'd use it with a printer at work, but we don't have that any longer. The inkjet layer on top of the Baryta should take up the solution, shouldn't it?

You tell us...

 

[lantau]

You tell us...

I guess it'll be time soon to try that Japanese brush I bought a while ago. UV light will be available again, now that spring is coming.

 

[Jerevan]

Keep us posted, Iantau.

I am going to buy a Schnupperbox (5 sheets) of Adox Baryta and see what I get, but I am still not fully convinced that it really works. If it does not turn out well, then I can always make a paper sculpture out of the leftovers.

 

[nmp]

I might get a pack myself. I am curious how it is for inkjet prints themselves and how they compare with baryta inkjet paper made by others like Ilford and Canson that I use currently. Also, Adox makes another baryta-based paper that has no coating at all that they recommend for liquid emulsion and other alternative processes. That might be interesting to try as well:

http://www.adox.de/Photo/photopaper/adox-art-baryta/


:Niranjan.

 

[Jerevan]

IAlso, Adox makes another baryta-based paper that has no coating at all that they recommend for liquid emulsion and other alternative processes. That might be interesting to try as well:

http://www.adox.de/Photo/photopaper/adox-art-baryta/

:Niranjan.

This is what I ordered ... I might be able to return a first impression in a few days, hopefully.

 

[Jerevan]

The Adox Art Baryta has arrived, so here are a few unsorted impressions from a late evening session.

The front of the paper (at least my guess) is glossy, and in general it has a feel of slightly thinner, calendared Bristol paper (or well, glossy fibre print surface). A bit iffy to get the coating on, and it dries slower than a more conventional paper.

The back has somewhat more texture. There it is more standard procedure to coat, soaks the cyanotype solation and gives a rich blue.

As it is, I need to do some more tests and do something bigger than 35 mm negatives. But even in that size, it looks and feels like an iron-toned conventional print; that is the cyanotype seems to be more "on the surface" than "inside" of the paper. Not sure yet what to make of it.

Compared to the Herschel paper I also have in stock, it is less prone to shed fibres if handled carelessly.

 

[nmp]

The Adox Art Baryta has arrived, so here are a few unsorted impressions from a late evening session.

The front of the paper (at least my guess) is glossy, and in general it has a feel of slightly thinner, calendared Bristol paper (or well, glossy fibre print surface). A bit iffy to get the coating on, and it dries slower than a more conventional paper.

The back has somewhat more texture. There it is more standard procedure to coat, soaks the cyanotype solation and gives a rich blue.

As it is, I need to do some more tests and do something bigger than 35 mm negatives. But even in that size, it looks and feels like an iron-toned conventional print; that is the cyanotype seems to be more "on the surface" than "inside" of the paper. Not sure yet what to make of it.

Compared to the Herschel paper I also have in stock, it is less prone to shed fibres if handled carelessly.

Thanks for the update.

So how does the top surface behave in terms of coatability....re: wetting, leveling, sensitizer absorption, etc. Is it different from the conventional fixed-out baryta photo papers that OP is using? I am assuming that if ADOX created this specifically for alternative processes, may be they did something to the surface to allow better coating. Or is it simply the exact paper with the same stack minus the silver gelatin emulsion.

:Niranjan.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

I've done it for kallitypes. I found if I brushed the sensitiser longer, I could get a decent coating and image. I also printed successfully on the backside. I used Ilford MG fibre.

 

[Jerevan]

The Adox behaves about the same as normal fixed-out photo paper ... that is, one needs to up the coating technique compared to watercolour paper. The Adox seems to be the same thing as fibre paper minus the silver emulsion.

It is good for coating, spreads nicely with a rod, but seems to absorb less of the coating immediately - it does not "sink into the paper" as quickly, which means there is a risk that the solution you put on the Adox might "flood" the surface. Crisp rendering, good saturated blue.

 

[artonpaper]

Have you looked at this work?

http://www.craigkoshykphoto.ca/vouloir-pouvoir.pdf

I had some success with Craig Koshyk's technique. I used uncoated baryta paper, rather than fixed out gelatin silver paper. There was a milkiness to the print, which I think was the baryta clay washing off the paper. I would like to try it again, but wash the paper thoroughly first. The other problem was the image was extremely contrasty. But that could be fixed as well, I'm sure. In his book, he does have a small reproduction of a cyanotype, made using his techniques. that is quite good. very rich, deep.

 

[nmp]

I had some success with Craig Koshyk's technique. I used uncoated baryta paper, rather than fixed out gelatin silver paper. There was a milkiness to the print, which I think was the baryta clay washing off the paper. I would like to try it again, but wash the paper thoroughly first. The other problem was the image was extremely contrasty. But that could be fixed as well, I'm sure. In his book, he does have a small reproduction of a cyanotype, made using his techniques. that is quite good. very rich, deep.

So what is this uncoated baryta paper, a paper without the gelatin topcoat? is it commercially available?

:Niranjan.

 

[NedL]

So what is this uncoated baryta paper, a paper without the gelatin topcoat? is it commercially available?
:Niranjan.

Yes, like this:
https://www.freestylephoto.biz/1554...ssy-Art-Paper-for-Alternative-Processes-12x16

I haven't tried it.

 

[nmp]

Yes, like this:
https://www.freestylephoto.biz/1554...ssy-Art-Paper-for-Alternative-Processes-12x16

I haven't tried it.

Hi, Ned - it looks like the same one I linked above in Post #14, isn't it? I am confused because artonpaper said he saw baryta (barium sulfate) coming off the paper which would point to the paper with bare baryta without a topcoat of gelatin. Hence the question.

:Niranjan.

 

[lantau]

I just looked at the Adox page for the paper and it states that there is already a gelatin undercoat on the Baryta layer.

 

[NedL]

Hi, Ned - it looks like the same one I linked above in Post #14, isn't it? I am confused because artonpaper said he saw baryta (barium sulfate) coming off the paper which would point to the paper with bare baryta without a topcoat of gelatin. Hence the question.

:Niranjan.

Ah sorry, missed the context. I've been out of town and lost the train of this thread even though I'd been following it. You're right of course!