Question about grain in a negative...

[Acticus]

This may be a goofy question, so I apologize in advance. I was thinking of trying my hand at platinum/palladium, or kallitype. The thing is, I have no access to a large format camera. I was thinking about using 35 mm format, digitizing with a DSLR, and then printing out an 8x10 negative on an inkjet. My digitizing process is quite good. I resolve the grain quite well. Here's the question. I've never actually seen one of these prints. Do they have a sort of grain? Some images on the web I've seen seem to show a type of grain, or a texture of some sort, almost a mottling. If so, I'm wondering whether a negative with grain from 35mm will look odd superimposed on the natural grain-like patterns on the platinum/palladium, or kallitype print.

 

[aldus_manutius]

First, I would strongly suggest you find the opportunity to see one such print "in the flesh"... until you have seen it for yourself all the descriptions and reproductions can only go so far.

Second, the work of Dan Burkholder alone should convince you of the effectiveness of the process you're describing undertaking (https://www.danburkholder.com/about.html#/). He has been instrumental in the use of "digital negatives" for alternative process printing, having started by scanning 35mm film in to Photoshop and printing inkjet negatives.

 

[Acticus]

First, I would strongly suggest you find the opportunity to see one such print "in the flesh"... until you have seen it for yourself all the descriptions and reproductions can only go so far.

Second, the work of Dan Burkholder alone should convince you of the effectiveness of the process you're describing undertaking (https://www.danburkholder.com/about.html#/). He has been instrumental in the use of "digital negatives" for alternative process printing, having started by scanning 35mm film in to Photoshop and printing inkjet negatives.

Thanks, I'll take a look at his website. Any idea where I could see some of these prints in person? I'd pay for someone here to mail me one if they were so inclined.

 

[MattKing]

The George Eastman museum in Rochester New York would be the best place to see any and all types of prints. Where are you located - "East Coast" could be lots of places!

 

[Acticus]

The George Eastman museum in Rochester New York would be the best place to see any and all types of prints. Where are you located - "East Coast" could be lots of places!

Well, I'm in the Philadelphia area. We have the Phila Art Museum. They are closed until early September, I guess covid-related.

 

[jeffreyg]

I've made pt/pd prints from scanned 2 1/4 , 4x5 direct and scanned, pinhole 4x5, digital capture 35mm format and digital point and shoot. enlarged negatives on x-ray duplicating film and Pictorico for a number of years. Remember that the solution soaks into the paper as opposed to an emulsion or ink on paper. So as mentioned the selection of paper and coating method will influence the look of the print. The coating method also can have an effect.
Plus 1 on Dan Burkholder for info and I woul add asking Bostick and Sullivan about questions you might have. They may supply someone near you who is making pt/pd prints.
I agree about seeing some prints in person and if possible ones that might not be covered by glass.

http://www.jeffreyglasser.com/

http://www.sculptureandphotography.com/

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

You cannot see any difference really. At least I can't. I print in several Alt processes, either with direct in camera neg, or digitised.

 

[J 3]

Some platinum prints have a (very) slight grain to them though it's different than film grain. Something about how the platinum develops on the paper with certain formulations. Likewise most platinum prints have a slight softness to them that would tend to obscure most source image grain.

Because of this I don't think it would look weird except maybe in the most extreme of situations (Say half frame tri X pushed 2 stops in Rhodinol).

 

[dpurdy]

Are you sure you want to go down that rabbit hole.. you have more money than you need? Platinum prints show lots of strange textural stuff, you have to know all the hoops to jump through to get rid of it and then the print doesn't scan as well due to paper texture. The grain of a 35mm neg is the least of your worries.

 

[J 3]

Platinum prints show lots of strange textural stuff, you have to know all the hoops to jump through to get rid of it and then the print doesn't scan as well due to paper texture.

Out of curiosity which platinum print method are you using or referring to? I've stuck to Na2 prints myself (so mostly palladium technically) and have not had a lot of platinum texture. Certainly not to the extent I'd have to use paper texture to mask it though I've heard of this before.

 

[aldus_manutius]

Well, I'm in the Philadelphia area. We have the Phila Art Museum. They are closed until early September, I guess covid-related.

Here's the first part of the heavy lifting done for you:

https://philamuseum.org/archives/

While the Museum is closed until 5 September, you can contact the archivist to make an appointment to do research on their print collection. Advance planning will give them time to locate materials you might be interested in seeing and pull them from storage. On that same page is a link (the next tab) to the form to schedule an appointment for research.

Before you do that, you might want to search their collections to see what they have in the way of platinum prints; again, some of the heavy lifting already done:

https://philamuseum.org/search?q=Platinum photographs

As you can see, they do have a few in the collection. With over 32,000 hits on that search, you should be able to find a few that you can look at more closely.

I do recommend that when you fill out the Appointment Form, you specify that you are researching platinum printing and that you need to see the physical print.

Good luck!

~~ Dennis

 

[aldus_manutius]

And to follow up on Dan — if you're on the East Coast, he is based out of New York. He also runs workshops, both face-to-face and online, and is an extremely personable instructor. It's worth sending an email and talking with him about getting started.

Ta!

~~Dennis

 

[Acticus]

Here's the first part of the heavy lifting done for you:

https://philamuseum.org/archives/

While the Museum is closed until 5 September, you can contact the archivist to make an appointment to do research on their print collection. Advance planning will give them time to locate materials you might be interested in seeing and pull them from storage. On that same page is a link (the next tab) to the form to schedule an appointment for research.

Before you do that, you might want to search their collections to see what they have in the way of platinum prints; again, some of the heavy lifting already done:

https://philamuseum.org/search?q=Platinum photographs

As you can see, they do have a few in the collection. With over 32,000 hits on that search, you should be able to find a few that you can look at more closely.

I do recommend that when you fill out the Appointment Form, you specify that you are researching platinum printing and that you need to see the physical print.

Good luck!

~~ Dennis

Hey, thanks for pointing that out. I just spent some time browsing their database of platinum prints. I also took a look at the carbons. The carbons seem to have more snap, blacker blacks, sharper too. I didn't see the link to the form though. I liked this platinum print.

 

[aldus_manutius]

The Appointment Form —

https://philamuseum.org/archives?page=2&formID=22

Remember that carbon, especially in the transfer methods, "works" differently than platinum/palladium/kallitype/argyrotype. And by that, I mean that "physically" the image is created on the page in a totally different way. With the PPKA prints, the image is "IN" the paper, the solutions soak into the fiber of the paper (which is why the paper texture can make such a huge difference in the overall appearance of the print).

Carbon images — talking about the transfer version here — sit ON TOP of the paper/support medium and have a three-dimensional quality that is a result of the way they were created (layers of sensitized gelatin, so the highlights are literally less physically dense).

So yeah, carbon can look very different.

 

[aldus_manutius]

Are you sure you want to go down that rabbit hole.. you have more money than you need? Platinum prints show lots of strange textural stuff, you have to know all the hoops to jump through to get rid of it and then the print doesn't scan as well due to paper texture. The grain of a 35mm neg is the least of your worries.

Hehe... really... rabbit hole is right!

But then it's the journey, not the destination, eh?

 

[pentaxuser]

The dog doing its best not to move its head or lips is trying to say that she needs to point the lens at its face and it cannot hold the pose much longer A great photo

pentaxuser

 

[J 3]

The Appointment Form —

https://philamuseum.org/archives?page=2&formID=22

Remember that carbon, especially in the transfer methods, "works" differently than platinum/palladium/kallitype/argyrotype. And by that, I mean that "physically" the image is created on the page in a totally different way. With the PPKA prints, the image is "IN" the paper, the solutions soak into the fiber of the paper (which is why the paper texture can make such a huge difference in the overall appearance of the print).

Carbon images — talking about the transfer version here — sit ON TOP of the paper/support medium and have a three-dimensional quality that is a result of the way they were created (layers of sensitized gelatin, so the highlights are literally less physically dense).

So yeah, carbon can look very different.

This is spot on.

Platinum prints are easier and less time consuming to do IMHO but the upfront cost for the chemistry is higher. Platinum produces a slightly soft (not as much as salt) mat image with lower black levels but really great light and midtones. Carbons have amazing darks (to the point you have to view in bright light to see into the full depth of the shadows in some cases) but highlight detail is tricky as the carbon often isn't sufficiently hardened in the highlights. It's a marker of skill to see a carbon with good highlight detail. Carbons can be very sharp and dmax is determined by whatever pigment you put in the goop. Luster is often differential on carbons with the shadows and highlight reflecting differently. One other difference is you have to deal with dichromate (carcinogenic) with carbons unless you use that diazo compound the EU carbon printers switched to.

I tend to think of platinum as complimenting portrait work well, and carbon complementing landscapes and macro work well but that's more of a personal choice.

 

[Acticus]

This is spot on.

Platinum prints are easier and less time consuming to do IMHO but the upfront cost for the chemistry is higher. Platinum produces a slightly soft (not as much as salt) mat image with lower black levels but really great light and midtones. Carbons have amazing darks (to the point you have to view in bright light to see into the full depth of the shadows in some cases) but highlight detail is tricky as the carbon often isn't sufficiently hardened in the highlights. It's a marker of skill to see a carbon with good highlight detail. Carbons can be very sharp and dmax is determined by whatever pigment you put in the goop. Luster is often differential on carbons with the shadows and highlight reflecting differently. One other difference is you have to deal with dichromate (carcinogenic) with carbons unless you use that diazo compound the EU carbon printers switched to.

I tend to think of platinum as complimenting portrait work well, and carbon complementing landscapes and macro work well but that's more of a personal choice.

Thanks, that's very informative.