SALT PRINT - First print dry - advise on waxing

[JOHN McMURTRIE]

This is how the finished print ended up once dry. It definitely lost a lot of contrast and is much darker than when it was in the Rapid Fixer. I am very happy especially as it was my first attempt (I don't want a pat on the back). I avoided a lot of problems by reading and listening to the excellent advise here. When I finished making the contact print I took the print out in daylight instead of in safe light and I think that has killed some of the contrast. That is probably the only step I will do differently next time. I am going to get some wax tomorrow in the hope that it will bring back a little contrast. Any advise on this appreciated? I will hopefully get another go at this on Wednesday and see if I can make a print close to the quality here.

 

[pdeeh]

Have a search of the forum (use the Google results), there's quite a few threads on waxing prints

 

[JOHN McMURTRIE]

Thanks! I am slowly sifting through it all. There is no one size fits all for any of this is there? I like that!

 

[Prof_Pixel]

Salt prints are my favorite historic process prints made in classes at the George Eastman Museum. They use bees wax with lavender oil to wax the prints and I love the results.

The d-min of your print looks high. There are a couple of possibilities (at least). (1) Your choice of paper used can make a BIG difference in print d-min; what paper are you using? (2) It could be that the d-max of your inkjet negative has low UV density. One way to check is to place a coin on the glass of your printing frame when making your exposure so you know one area of the print receives no exposure and should be your d-min.

 

[pdeeh]

There is no one size fits all for any of this is there? I like that!

sorta kinda ...
it depends on your tendency towards obsession-compulsion I reckon.

Once you find yourself in the garden at midnight building models of the Silver chloride and Citric acid molecules out of used teabags, and the rest of the time repeatedly typing posts at APUG consisting of only the words "All AgNO3 And No NH4Cl Makes John A Dull Boy" , and your children invite two approved clinicians round with a pair of hefty blokes with a backwards-jacket just your size in tow ... then you will have reached the apotheosis of salt fever; and it may be time to find a less complicated hobby.

 

[JOHN McMURTRIE]

I am using Hahnemuhle 300g 100% cotton Platinum Rag which has a really vibrant white. I suspect my inkjet negative as well. I printed it on the transparency setting when I should have done it on Glossy print quality which I think will give me a heavier black. I also think opening the contact frame in the bright daylight contributed to the loss to the D-Min. I am printing again later this week and will try the coin trick to mask and see what I get. Thanks for the advise on the wax also.

 

[JOHN McMURTRIE]

sorta kinda ...
it depends on your tendency towards obsession-compulsion I reckon.

Once you find yourself in the garden at midnight building models of the Silver chloride and Citric acid molecules out of used teabags, and the rest of the time repeatedly typing posts at APUG consisting of only the words "All AgNO3 And No NH4Cl Makes John A Dull Boy" , and your children invite two approved clinicians round with a pair of hefty blokes with a backwards-jacket just your size in tow ... then you will have reached the apotheosis of salt fever; and it may be time to find a less complicated hobby.

Ha!!! I really thought I was going to have a lot of problems with this process and I am hoping it wasn't just first time lucky! Not planning on getting obsessed by this but I really love the look and feel of the prints. The goal is to produce some limited edition print runs once I have it nailed. That is if I do get it nailed.

 

[Prof_Pixel]

It may be that your printer's black ink doesn't offer the best UV blocking. Check the PDF by George Smyth that I referenced in another thread for a way to determine the best ink setting.

 

[NedL]

I haven't tried that paper myself but from what I've read others have used it successfully. Don't look at the unfixed print except in dim indirect light or dim incandescent light. That's going to make a big difference. Ignore my post in the other thread -- like prof_pixel, I thought the d-min was likely due to your paper choice. Although it's still good to try different papers to get an idea of what is possible.

I've tried Dorland's wax medium, beeswax mixed with lavender oil, and beeswax mixed with odorless turpentine substitute. On some papers it can make the darkest areas look deeper and darker, almost like they are wet. On some papers it seems to do almost nothing except add a surface sheen. I wonder if it might add a little protection to plain untoned salt prints, but I don't know the answer. Yet another variable in this process with endless variations!

I would never use USED teabags when I make my AgCL and Citric Acid molecules in the garden at midnight. Only pristine PG Tips pyramid bags. Do you guys hear that distant siren? I wonder if there's a fire somewhere? Maybe I'd better go hide in the closet in case they come to the wrong house like last time.....

 

[Prof_Pixel]

The paper used at the GEM in the salt printing classes is Fabriano Bristol

 

[pdeeh]

Sometimes its helpful to consider the direction of "grain" of the paper when considering which way to print the negative.
For instance,when I print a woodland scene with a lot of strong verticals, I prefer to print with the "grain" of the paper running with those verticals.
Of course not all papers have an obvious "grain", or have a "knotted" look.
It wasn't until I started altprinting that I discovered there is a fantastic and complex and fascinating world of paper ... easy to get sucked in to that,let alone all the rest of the salty business!
Fabriano Bristol is next to impossible to obtain easily in the UK,but can be got from GreatArt.

 

[GregW]

The evenness of the fog in your print has me wondering about the 'safety' of the area where you are coating or drying your paper? I suppose peeking at it in direct light outside could also do this if you don't use a split frame? All that said this is still a lovely print with great contrast.

 

[JOHN McMURTRIE]

The paper was definitely clean with no fogging when put in the frame. I think it was because I did all my wet processing in daylight. Have moved my wash and fix into the shed under safe light conditions and see what I get later today. It is much cloudier day which should produce more contrast. It was super bright and sunny when I printed the above. I have 3 sheets sensitised and 3 negs ready to go. Using the silver Nitrate that I bottled with citric acid 3 days ago. Interested to see how different they will all look from my first print.

 

[nmp]

The paper was definitely clean with no fogging when put in the frame. I think it was because I did all my wet processing in daylight. Have moved my wash and fix into the shed under safe light conditions and see what I get later today. It is much cloudier day which should produce more contrast. It was super bright and sunny when I printed the above. I have 3 sheets sensitised and 3 negs ready to go. Using the silver Nitrate that I bottled with citric acid 3 days ago. Interested to see how different they will all look from my first print.

If you put a small piece of aluminum foil in the border area, you will be able to figure out whether or not you have adequate dmax on your d-----l negative.