Print steaming...

I don't post often, but I've got to report on how enthused I am about the results of print steaming, as I've heard about here and on John Sexton's website - http://johnsexton.com/newsletter11-2008.html#anchor07

I was a bit skeptical when an APUG member suggested I try steaming my air-dried FB prints to achieve the highest gloss, but I finally got around to trying it. I first used it on some brand new prints on the new MCC 110, which seems to be a lovely paper, but with a somewhat duller surface than some others I've used, such as the old Forte Polywarmtone. The improvement in the gloss of the MCC 110 was significant, to the extent that I can't imagine not steaming all future MCC 110 prints in this manner!

Today I was sorting some older prints, and came across an old print on Portriga Rapid, which must have been from my very last box of that stuff. I remember Portriga Rapid 111 as having a beautiful surface back in the seventies, but something in its manufacture must have changed and its surface was dull and often uneven in later years. The print in question had the dull, lifeless surface that encouraged me to quit using Portriga in the eighties. Anyway, I thought I'd try the steaming procedure on this old print and it was a great success; the image looks so much better with a real gloss surface!

So, I guess I'll need to bring a hotplate into my darkroom, or check out a clothing steamer. I think steaming will become a regular part of my process.

Gary,
East Snook, TX

Well it's a technique been posted on APUG quite a few times, and well before John Sextons news letter.

I don't steam that many prints but I've been doing it for at least 25 years, it does work well with MCC in particular but Polywarmtone is is good to, all my prints are air dried then pressed in a drymounting presss and this knocks the natural gloss. Sometimes I dry an odd print quickly in front of a gas fire or over a gas ring on the cooker and that works just as well.

Ian

I find that it works quite well with Ilford MGIV FB.

This is the part of Sexton's article that got my printing nerves all tingly;

"In addition, when spotting (or more correctly unspotting) prints, telltale residue from retouching dyes can sometimes be visible when looking at the print at an oblique angle. Steaming, which micro-swells the upper layer of the gelatin, will allow the print dyes to be absorbed within the surface of the print, thus minimizing or sometimes completely eliminating any surface evidence of the dye’s application."

I'll be trying this for sure!!!!!!!

Murray

Does steaming "heal" the surface scratching that comes from razor blading out a black spot on a print? And, does it spread out the spotting dye that one needs to apply to return the scratched area to the surrounding tonality? I've only read about steaming, but not tried it.

As Murray says "I'll be trying this for sure!!!!!!!". I recently bought in the supermarket a SteamBee by JML which produces steam for cleaning around the house, I was using it to remove ground in dirt from the floor. That job is now completed and I can turn to my B&W prints.

jovo said:

Does steaming "heal" the surface scratching that comes from razor blading out a black spot on a print? And, does it spread out the spotting dye that one needs to apply to return the scratched area to the surrounding tonality? I've only read about steaming, but not tried it.

Click to expand...

The trick I was taught many years ago (70's) was to get a gummed envelope and use a drop of water to put some of the gum on your spotting palette and mix with the Spotone, this then gives a matching gloss, steaming seems to help it merge with the gelatin, butthe secret of retouchingis not to try and match perfectly rather to just do enough so it's invisible.

Ian

I sometimes make smaller prints, 5x7 or so, that are meant to be viewed in your hands, not behind glass. When held so closely and intimately the different reflective quality of spotted areas tend to interrupt the experience. It would be great not to have imperfections on the prints surface drawing attention from the photograph itself.

Murray

An anecdotal observation...

I have noticed a similar effect when microwave-drying damp (squeegeed) test prints to verify drydown exposure factors. My current paper is Kentmere Bromide glossy FB. The enhancement of surface gloss is substantial, and very pleasing to my eye. The non-ferrotyped texture remains, but after microwaving it just glistens beautifully - almost as if still wet.

I have always guessed that this effect is the result of a sort of micro-ferrotyping by heat, but without the major surface alteration imposed by the ferrotype plate pressure. But this is just speculation on my part.

Could this perhaps be the same effect as "steaming?"

Ken

bump

I would like to know if the effect of steaming will last or is it a temporary thing?
does the local humidity affect this technique.. In Canada 6 months of the year, we have extremely low humidity and I would imagine would affect this post printing steaming.
Would the low humidity cancel out the steam put into the print?

any thoughts.

Bob, it lasts because it's the combination of high heat & humidity that re-swell the gelatin, so images I steamed in the 80's are still the same today. That goes for images both here in Turkey & the UK>

Ian

Thanks Ian

Ian Grant said:

Bob, it lasts because it's the combination of high heat & humidity that re-swell the gelatin, so images I steamed in the 80's are still the same today. That goes for images both here in Turkey & the UK>

Ian

Click to expand...