Retouching negatives

[Dan Dozer]

Does anyone out there still retouch their negatives the "old fashioned way" to get rid of imperfections in the negative? Or is an easier way to deal with it to use shading on masks which to me starts to sound like a very similar if not the same thing?

I'm sure that there are some of you more "experienced" darkroom people out there who still know hot to do this (working on negatives with pencils/graphite). Is it a real difficult art to learn? If one wants to seriously try it, should you get an Adams Negative Retouching Machine?

Do modern film have the right type of surfaces to do actual retouching?

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

Yes, I do some retouching with large format negs. Try a search on "neg retouching" or "retouching negatives" and you should turn up a few older threads on this topic, discussing some of the techniques.

 

[jp498]

I don't retouch/improve faces or anything like that if you're asking.

If you shoot 8x10, retouching pinholes and minor scratches is really easy. I've used different sized sharpies and pencils.

 

[removed account4]

i used to retouch my negatives with an adams retouching desk
but when i was broke i sold it and all my pencils + leads off.

once you get the hang of it, it is pretty easy to do ...
john

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

I think here or on the LF forum I posted a formula for retouching fluid. As I recall it wasn't that complicated--basically boiled turpentine, or something along those lines. Kodak LF films tend to have a retouching surface on the base side, so it isn't always needed, but some of the East European films are shiny on the base side, so they may need retouching fluid.

I have a couple of manuals with instructions for making retouching fluid and other useful things, and I've reverse engineered abrasive reducer for thinning dense highlights (I've also posted that info before, so a search should turn it up), but my manuals are in storage at the moment. The old books usually have this information.

 

[2F/2F]

If a neg ever has a hole in it (i.e. a piece of emulsion missing), I will pencil in the hole with a soft lead pencil until it is darker than the rest of the area, and then spot out the resulting lighter spot on the print. It is not fun either way, but I find it a billion times easier to do properly than etching off a black spot on the print. I have never been able to do that.

I do not do any "beauty" retouching on negs. Never tried it.

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

If you have a really tiny pinhole in the emulsion, you can stipple the film base with a sharp stylus or a pin, held perpendicular to the film, just over and around the area where the pinhole is, and the light scatter will often eliminate the pinhole in the print. This is surprisingly effective, and if it doesn't work, then you can still opaque the pinhole and spot the print.

 

[Toffle]

If you have a really tiny pinhole in the emulsion, you can stipple the film base with a sharp stylus or a pin, held perpendicular to the film, just over and around the area where the pinhole is, and the light scatter will often eliminate the pinhole in the print. This is surprisingly effective, and if it doesn't work, then you can still opaque the pinhole and spot the print.

I have read this before, but I've never been brave enough to try it. (just like I've never tried the nose oil thing either... and not because my nose isn't oily enough... ask my wife. )

 

[Dan Dozer]

Thanks everyone for the feedback so far. The thing that got me started on this was a section in a book I have on George Hurrell showing a straight print and a retouched print of Joan Crawford and the differences were absolutely amazing. However, it also said that his re-toucher spent 6 hours doing it (and he knew what he was doing). I've been doing a fair amount of portrait type of work lately and it just got me thinking.

I've been doing some searching on the internet and there are a few of the old books on retouching that are dirt cheap from the used book sites, so resource material should be pretty easy to get.

Dan

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

Retouching is part of the genre and technical repertoire of formal portraiture, as I see it, so I don't have a problem with it. It doesn't apply in Weston's case, where the unretouched portrait was an artistic statement, but in general, I think it's one of those things that people became less aware of with the rise of 35mm photography, because the negatives were harder to retouch, though for commercial portraiture, it's always been pretty much part of the process.

Hurrell liked the glow of clean skin, so he had subjects pose with only lip and eye makeup and skin blemishes were retouched on the neg, instead of being masked on the subject with makeup.

 

[Christopher Nisperos]

Does anyone out there still retouch their negatives the "old fashioned way" to get rid of imperfections in the negative? ... with pencils/graphite.

Yep, me, for one!

Is it a real difficult art to learn?

Naw, it just takes practice. A crazy passion helps, too.

If one wants to seriously try it, should you get an Adams Negative Retouching Machine?

It's not necessary, but it helps. The Adams machine is only useful up to a certain sized negative (never tried 8x10 on it, for example). You can use a "retouching stand" just as well. However, you'll probably find it easier to retouch medium format (or smaller!) negatives using the Adams machine.

Do modern film have the right type of surfaces to do actual retouching?

Yes, they do. The manufacturers call it a retouching "tooth". However, if you 'dope' the negative first with retouching fluid —even a "modern" negative— pencil retouching becomes a lot easier (in my own experience .. perhaps some of you don't need it?)

Formulas for making your own retouching fluid can be found in older sources such as the BJP Almanac or perhaps Morgan & Morgan's big, red Photolab Index, I don't remember and can't get at it . . . I might even have an extra bottle of factory-mixed dope hiding in some dark drawer, for someone who may be forlornly searching. (NB: "might" means no promises!)

Best,

Christopher Nisperos

:

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

No problem with 8x10" negs on the Adams Machine. I think even 11x14" is possible. It's a format I shoot occasionally, but I can't recall whether I've retouched an 11x14" neg. Probably.