Recommend an Alternative Process - I have no Dark Room

If you're going to make your own silver gelatine POP paper, not sure if the process is going to be any simpler than Vandyke Brown. OTOH Lumen is extremely simple as it uses photographic paper (even fogged ones from eBay can work fine) and only a fixer is needed to make the print permanent (some artists skip the fixing step and store their Lumen prints in complete darkness after scanning). And for the tinkerer in you, there are several variants of Lumen that can also be explored including CyanoLumen.

A quick way to try cyanotype is to use a commercial paper sunprint.org , a tray of water to develop it indoors, and a sheet of glass or acrylic to act as a contact printer. And some sunshine. Cyanotype can be toned to something other than blue.

If it seems worth pursuing you can look at coating your own paper, or move on to other light-sensitive materials.



[Disclosure: sunprint.org is actually a domain run by the Lawrence Hall of Science at the University of California, Berkeley. I used to work there. There are some examples at dotinthelandscape.org from when I was playing with wine tannin.]

Alan Edward Klein said:

Which alt processes don't require sinks, if any?

Click to expand...

None come to mind.
POP (Printing Out Paper) prints generally are fixed and washed. Cyanotypes are washed out. Van Dyke prints and salted paper prints are fixed and washed. Platinum/palladium prints are developed and washed. Kallitypes are developed, fixed and washed.

There's one process that yields inherently unstable prints and it's sloooooooow, but doesn't technically require a sink. It's the anthotype. It's essentially a direct contact dye destruction printing process, which is a very expensive way to describe how you can brush beetroot juice onto paper, then put it in contact with a film-based image of high contrast in a contact frame and put it in a sunny spot for a few weeks. You'll get a positive print as the dye bleaches out in the areas that receive exposure. Since the remaining dyes are inherently unstable (beetroot makes nasty stains, but they disappear), the prints won't last, even if you keep them in dark storage. But you could scan them and preserve them digitally that way, perhaps even make inkjet 'copies'.

A similar approach can be adopted with lumen prints, where you expose the paper and then don't fix it. Evidently, the prints will disappear if they are exposed to light later on. You could photograph the print in a dim room with a single pop of flash and then consider the digital image the final product, again using inkjet tech to make permanent copies. But usually, lumen prints are fixed so they become permanent.

Of course, you technically don't really need a sink - you could just use a countertop and trays and big jars of water. Collect any waste water in a bucket and ditch that somewhere at the end of the session. But a sink is generally more practical.

How to develop the film suitable for printing? As far as I know, the methods for developing the film used for printing and the film used for enlargement or duplication are different.

xiaruan said:

How to develop the film suitable for printing? As far as I know, the methods for developing the film used for printing and the film used for enlargement or duplication are different.

Click to expand...

I feel this is a question for another thread, or at least for a stage where OP has decided which printing process(es) he'd like to pursue. In general, your observation that the negative ideally should be developed to the requirements of the purpose is of course correct. Having said that, there's some flexibility, again depending on the purpose.

It is not necessary to have a sink or running water where you do your printing and processing. I have done all mine in a space that had none by using stationary trays (most of the time a single one) for all wet steps, collecting the effluents in gallon cans and then dumping them in the kitchen or bathroom sink at the end of the session.

:Niranjan.

Here is my take on the original question...

1) Cyanotype is the typical 'gateway' into alternative process printing. The chemicals are inexpensive. The solutions needed are simple to make and the processing trivial. Van Dyke Brown prints are almost as simple and therefore also a good choice. However, being a silver based process it is a bit more expensive than cyanotype which is iron-based.

There are multiple variations of cyanotype but the classic version is probably a good place to start, especially if you use dilute acid (vinegar or citric acid) for the first wash instead of plain water.

If you want to get started without having to weigh solids and mix solutions, kits for these process (and many others) are available. Bostick & Sullivan and the Photographers Formulary are the two main suppliers.

2) Initially, use a paper that is made for alternative process printing or one that is known to work well with the process you choose without needed to pre-treat it. Using a variety of papers is part of the fun of alt process printing. However, this aspect is best left to explore once you can make prints reliably.

The alt process specific papers (Hahn. Platinum Rag, Legion Revere Platinum and Arches Platine, are the 'big ones') are relatively expensive but will eliminate one variable (i.e. source of failure) from your learning process.

A good source of information on paper is Chris Anderson's 'massive paper chart', see: https://www.alternativephotography.com/massive-paper-chart/. The paid version is well worth the small price.

3) Buy or make a printing frame with a split back, it is especially useful for printing out process such as cyanotype and Van Dyke. There is lots of good information regarding printing frames, here: https://www.alternativephotography.com/diy-contact-printing-frames-for-alt-photo/ and here: https://www.alternativephotography.com/buy-printing-frame-reviews/

4) Initially, use the sun as a light source for exposure. You can't beat the price. If you want an artificial source, consider 495 nm LEDs. Again, lots of good info at: https://www.alternativephotography.com/diy-uv-light-boxes-alternative-photography/

5) Have you noticed a pattern in then last few items?! https://www.alternativephotography.com/ is a source of much great information about alt process printing.

Other good sources are books by James (https://www.amazon.com/Book-Alternative-Photographic-Processes/dp/1285089316) which is, alas priced like a textbook or one by Enfield (https://www.amazon.com/Enfields-Guide-Photographic-Alternative-Processes/dp/1138229075). There are others but those are the ones I am most familiar with.

Also very good are the series of books (see: https://www.routledge.com/Contempor...rnative-Process-Photography/book-series/CPAPP) edited by Chris Anderson. These books are narrower in scope than those cited above but are very, very good.

6) As for a working space, one does not need a darkroom nor does one need running water.

Remember that many of these processes were invented in the last half of the 19th century before indoor was common. I have made cyanotypes at a remote cabin with no electricity nor running water. I hauled water from the lake.

One does not even need a particularly dim room these days.

What one needs is a space that excludes UV light (sunlight and fluorescent lights), a source of water and a place to get rid of waste water. Some counter or table space is also very handy.

I generally work in my basement with all of the lights ON! The lights are warm LED bulbs which replaced compact fluorescent bulbs in the ceiling fixtures. I haul water/waste water to and from my basement in five gallon buckets.

I wash prints in non-running water. Usually six trays moving prints from tray to tray every 5 or 10 minutes depending on the process. Agitation is intermittent; meaning when I remember to do it between other tasks!

This space works for all of the processes I use: cyanotype (including toning), salted paper (my main process), platinum/palladium and cuprotype.

My final recommendation...

Buy a copy of Chris Anderson's cyanotype book and start there. If you get tired of the 'blue" buy the book in her series written by Annette Golaz on toning cyanotypes with botanical materials.

Experiment and have fun. Every practitioner of alt process printing adapts things to their own circumstances and space. There are no definitive practices in this realm. One key to success is repeatability. Make careful notes as you work so you can reproduce your successes and avoid repeating mistakes. As you work out the kinks, change only a single variable at a time. Did I mention... have fun!

grahamp said:

A quick way to try cyanotype is to use a commercial paper sunprint.org , a tray of water to develop it indoors, and a sheet of glass or acrylic to act as a contact printer. And some sunshine. Cyanotype can be toned to something other than blue.

Click to expand...

The effect of wine tannin looked pretty good to me

pentaxuser

nmp said:

It is not necessary to have a sink or running water where you do your printing and processing. I have done all mine in a space that had none by using stationary trays (most of the time a single one) for all wet steps, collecting the effluents in gallon cans and then dumping them in the kitchen or bathroom sink at the end of the session.

Click to expand...

Since we have no idea how much "space" Alan (OP) has, we are completely in the dark -- YUK, YUK. All we know is that he has no darkroom -- maybe because he has no space!

xkaes said:

Since we have no idea how much "space" Alan (OP) has, we are completely in the dark -- YUK, YUK. All we know is that he has no darkroom -- maybe because he has no space!

Click to expand...

He specifically asked if there was a sink required. Hence my answer.

:Niranjan.

I do wonder though whether Alan was thinking about a sink big enough for a bunch of trays when he asked.
Many of us have been able to do a lot with something the size of a kitchen sink, plus a flat counter or table.

There's a lot here to digest. Thanks everyone for your input.

Andrew O'Neill said:

You don't really need a darkroom. I did cyanotypes with kids in Japan, in a dimly lit classroom. We used the Sun to expose them. The question is, what density range are your lab developed films?

Click to expand...

The outside lab develops 4x5 Tmax film, which is what I usually use so I suppose the density range is normal. Does any of this make much difference? The lab can push and pull if requested.

Andrew O'Neill said:

You don't really need a darkroom. I did cyanotypes with kids in Japan, in a dimly lit classroom. We used the Sun to expose them. The question is, what density range are your lab developed films?

Click to expand...

Don_ih said:

Cyanotype. Cheaper than platinum printing by a mile but a good way to get your feet wet. Use the sun for exposing the print.

Click to expand...

Peter Schrager said:

Come take a trip to Connecticut and ill teach you how made your own POP PAPERS!!
NO DARKROOM REQUIRED!

Click to expand...

koraks said:

Cyanotype and Van Dyke Brown. These are the most common 'gateway drugs' to alt. process printing. Both processes are easy to get decent prints out of using cheap and easily available materials.

Click to expand...

Raghu Kuvempunagar said:

Try Lumen process. You don't even need to coat the paper with a sensitiser.

Christina Z. Anderson, The Experimental Darkroom, is a great reference for Lumen and other interesting processes.

Click to expand...

So to understand, which of these processes takes sensitized paper and all I have to do is expose it to the sun or artificial light with the 4x5 negative overlaid (contact type print, no enlarger)? The only chemical needed would be to stop the development.

Easiest is lumen printing. You only need photo paper.

Second easiest is precoated cyanotype. Well, about as easy, actually.

Third easiest is coat-your-own cyanotype. You need the chemicals, paper, and a brush.

Everything else gets bit by bit more complicated.

Don_ih said:

Easiest is lumen printing. You only need photo paper.

Second easiest is precoated cyanotype. Well, about as easy, actually.

Third easiest is coat-your-own cyanotype. You need the chemicals, paper, and a brush.

Everything else gets bit by bit more complicated.

Click to expand...

Which can you print using Tmax negatives?

I found these cyanotype kits but they don;t seem to work with negatives? What am I missing?

I'm not familiar with cyanotype kits, but you could probably use them for contact printing negatives. Probably a good way to try cyanotype. If you end up liking it, then buy the two chemicals needed. All you need is water to process.

...and if you don't like the blue, you can play around with all the various tonings available, including bleaching out (sodium carbonate, which I source at pool chem supply shop) and redeveloping in tannins.

Alan Edward Klein said:

I found these cyanotype kits but they don;t seem to work with negatives? What am I missing?

Cyanotype Kit - Yahoo Image Search Results

Click to expand...

These kits (which are invariably traditional cyanotype chemistry) should work just fine with negatives, if you have an appropriate negative. As seen in the search you linked to many folks start out in alt process making photograms with cyanotype instead of printing negatives. However, the process/chemistry is not specific to photographs. In fact, I would hazard a guess that most folks who try cyanotype are perfectly satisifyed with making only photograms.

Regarding 'appropriate negatives'... each alt process is able to print a specific range of tones (i.e. scale). To get the best results from any process one has to match the contrast of the negative to the scale of the process. One can use a 'random' negative and one might be satisfied with the resulting print but it unlikely to yield an optimal print.

With film negatives one needs to tailor the development of the film specifically to the printing process. This requires significant experience. I doubt that most commercial labs are capable of this although you might find a specialist lab that offers this service. I can't add any more detail here as I switched to digital negatives (see below) roughly twenty years ago.

Alternatively, one can use a hybrid process where one begins by developing film as one would for a typical sliver gelatin print. Then one digitizes the negative and applies a 'curve' to the resulting file to match the contrast of the negative to the desired alt process. Lastly one prints this file onto a clear plastic sheet to make a 'digital negative'.

Of course one can also use a completely digital process where one processes a file to make a monochrome image, inverts that image to make a negative, applies a curve and prints a negative (as described above).

All of these approaches to 'appropriate negatives' have a significant learning curve in order to make 'perfect' negatives. Also, note that I have omitted any mention about how those curves are generated in the first place. That is a 'can of worms' best left for another time! ;-)

However, that said, many folks are satisfied with less than perfect negatives for their alt process printing. Thus, you might just start with a few interesting negative already in your possession and see how things go.

Alan Edward Klein said:

Which can you print using Tmax negatives?

Click to expand...

Normally developed Tmax .... probably none. Or I doubt you'd get much contrast.

Andrew O'Neill said:

...and if you don't like the blue, you can play around with all the various tonings available, including bleaching out (sodium carbonate, which I source at pool chem supply shop) and redeveloping in tannins.

Click to expand...

Just an FYI... sodium carbonate is also often sold in the laundry aisle of the grocery store as 'washing soda'.

fgorga said:

Just an FYI... sodium carbonate is also often sold in the laundry aisle of the grocery store as 'washing soda'.

Click to expand...

Due to supply issues in Canada (so I've been told), most stores have switched to the alternative laundry whitener, Borax. Thankfully, Canadian Tire, and other hardware stores carry pool supplies.

Alan, to find what neg DR works for Cyanotype (assuming that is what you go with...) just do a ring-around of negatives, all exposed the same, but developed at different times

One small note about T-Max negatives.
As Alan may or may not be aware, most of the Alternative processes are UV light based, and involve contact printing, so if you want to print something, your negative needs to be the same size as the print desired. Which means either small prints or negatives from a large format camera or one of the options that you can use to make intermediate enlarged negatives.*
And with respect to the T-Max films, while T-Max 400 negatives behave normally with any process that uses UV light, T-Max 100 happens to include a UV blocker, so T-Max 100 negatives are unsuitable for most such processes.

*(excepting the brave souls who are experimenting with building large, high power UV enlargers - definitely not an alternative for someone without the space for a normal darkroom)

Alan Edward Klein said:

I see there are many alternative processes. Which ones would you recommend for someone like myself who sends their film out to develop and has no dark room?

Unblinking Eye - photography, darkroom, alternative process, historic photographic processes, travel

Click to expand...

Alan, I had the same thoughts about two months ago after watching a video by a member here about making Kallitypes, and I decided that I had to give it a go.

Since I sold off most of my darkroom gear about 20 years ago in favour of digital for production work, I've been mainly shooting MF and LF film in my spare time, scanning it with a V850, and then printing on a Canon Pro10s. I've been happy with the results, but recently with more spare time on my hands decided to get my hands wetter again.

The best bet to start is with a visit to alternativephotography.com.

I started with the traditional Cyanotype process in order to a whole process working in my brain. It's quite steep learning how to create a digital internegative and you will go through lots of Chemistry, paper and transparency film getting something acceptable. Took me about 3 weeks to get a nice cyanotype from a MF negative. Keep in mind you have to iterating until you get the result you are looking for. You need to keep a lot of notes.

Once I had that nutted out, I started with Kallitype - that was faster as I already had the iteration process down and just had to get all the chemical side down.

You will spend a lot of time and materials getting an acceptable print, which is a shocker if you've been doing digital for a while.

If you're thinking of going straight from film to print and skipping the digital interneg, you're going to have to find an exposure and processing system that gives a negative suitable for the process - personally I think printing a digital negative is the best route.