Printing a cyanotype with a paper negative. Advice, please.

You might try using Japanese rice paper for the negatives. It is very thin. Any non-drying oil would work. I once made a grease spot photometer for a school project and used bacon grease.

Ah! I'm sorry I missed "Surrey"!

And the same thing happens here... often in late afternoon the fog comes rolling in, and in the winter the tree shadows start early. Many times I've been out walking around in the yard with my contact frame, trying to find the last sunlight to finish off a print. And it doesn't work very well.. late in the day even if you can get direct sunlight, it's not very actinic. And for whatever reason, the prints made with the BLB bulbs seem to me to be "missing something".. I can't put my finger on it but they never look quite as good and it seems to be harder to control contrast "just right". I mostly use the BLB for testing and not much for making final prints. I don't know if that would be a problem with cyanotype.

With salt printing, there is a "developed out" version that be done even on cloudy days. I've never tried it and I don't know if there is something similar for cyanotype. Beside x-ray film or litho film or digital OHP... it does seem that oiled or waxed FB paper negatives might be a good thing to try. I'm having trouble imagining coating liquid light on vellum... it tends to curl when it gets wet and is not dimensionally stable, and the clearprint vellum has screen markings. Dura-lar or glass would probably work, but then it's not really a paper negative anymore, is it! And single weight paper isn't very common anymore, RC or FB. Good luck! Let us know how it goes if you try something!

Thanks I'll let you know how it goes. My cyanotype using OHP sheet is quite handsome but it doesn't have any real shadow detail. It may be that the OHP negative wasn't up to it or it might have been overexposed in the sun. I was pleased with the result but knew it could be better. I would invest in a box of sheet film if I thought I'd make lots of cyanotypes but I don't think I ever will and I'd have no use for the expensive film. Having said that, there is some Shanghai sheet film (new) on the well known auction site that is relatively cheap. It might be fun to play.

Svenedin said:

It is possible of course but could mean weeks of waiting to get a sunny day with enough continuous sun

Click to expand...

You don't need continuous sun.

I live on the same latitude as you, and I print year round (when I can be arsed) using the sun.

There is sufficient UV even under a veiled sky to trigger reduction, although of course one does see an increase in printing times.

I've printed faster (more sensitive) alt-processes on fully overcast days.

As for Ned, it is perfectly scurrilous for him never to have made a cyanotype.
Perfectly. Scurrilous.

That's good news. I'll order that 25 sheet box of Shanghai film and have a play. Should be fun and bound to go wrong multiple times. I've never enlarged onto film before.

I'm assuming that the only way to determine the correct exposure onto the film is going to be test strips. Is there any way to get a rough idea of exposure so that I start reasonably close to the correct exposure?

I often make a quick print from a 6x6 negative on a scrap of sensitised paper to see what the day is doing.
I'm lucky enough to have a few old contact frames so that makes it very easy to check for exposure. Without a uv meter (`expensive) you never quite know what the sky is throwing at you.
In midsummer at noon I get exposure times of a few mins. Open blue sky winter, 20-30 maybe. Dull summer - 15? Dull winter - 30-40-50.
You'll need to work it out yourself really and it depends on what kind of contrast you're looking for.
I judge exposure by looking at how heavy and metallic the shadow regions look but that's just me..
I'd encourage you to just get on and try a few ,you can overthink cyanotypes

Yes I will have a go and if I can learn how to make decent quality larger negatives I will almost certainly want to explore other alternative processes. I've ordered the sheet film.

Svenedin said:

Unfortunately X-ray film is not readily available in the UK. All I can find is in the USA.

Click to expand...

Just to say, that I'm also in the UK and bought some x-ray film off of ebay from the states, with no problems at all.

Still must find time to use it though, in my 10 x 8 pinhole camera, especially whilst we're getting some nice weather occasionally at the moment.

Terry S

r

Gerald C Koch said:

You might try using Japanese rice paper for the negatives. It is very thin. Any non-drying oil would work. I once made a grease spot photometer for a school project and used bacon grease.

Click to expand...

Helix Vellum, Bienfang Graphics 360, and Clearprint No.1000HP Design Vellum all work well for handcoated paper negatives. All are 100% rag and acid free with a minimum of texture. Oiling the negatives increases the appearance of texture in the final print.

i've never used architectural velum but i have used bordon and reily paper that
they refer to as velum, acid free too, not too expensive and comes in a big fat pad.
i think it is their #116 / 90lb ... not as thin as butcher paper, or xerox paper but its nice..
i've used japanese papers but they are so thin its hard to work with some of them ,,

Hey, well... I fell quite dumb posting to a thread that hasn't had recent activity, but just for the record, here it goes:

A year ago I got chemicals for a type of cyanotype formulae that was claimed to be faster. So fast the author was making exposures in-camera.
https://www.alternativephotography.com/photography-with-iron-iii-salt

Since I'm planning to do the same thing nsurit was attempting back on 2012, I made a test with an existing bw photograph on rc paper to kinda feel the exposure time. On atumn sun, I got to see that 10 minutes (using the formula above, but with oxalate instead of sulphate) was giving me a slightly overexposed print.

I'll make a new thread if anyone wants to try my formulae, because I think I've changed it a bit from what Arpan said.

Just for the record.

There's also an interesting blog entry about faster variations of the cyanotype formulae:
https://slykasstuff.tumblr.com/post/155772150296/comparing-different-cyanotype-techniques