If you want a true historic answer related to Talbots original salt prints (photogenic drawings), contrast is not inherent in this process. If you use his original formulation and dry in darkness, a scan can provide what you may be looking for. But then people on this site will probably say that I dont know what Im talking about.
Serdar, not exactly an answer to your actual question but I still wanted to mention: I remember reading somewhere (could be Reilly's The Albumen and Salted Paper Book - full of useful information...) that the silver solution's strength should be about 6x of your salt solution - I mean for best results... I think you can use a 12% silver solution; more silver -> stronger / darker and contrasty (in terms of print's dynamic range) images...
I have little to add to Jim's comment: I personally use Pyrocat-MC (mixed it myself, you don't necessarily have to mail order it...), this developer is capable of giving strongly UV blocking negatives and lots of exposure scale. (10-12 stops...) Definitely try it! Also, FP4+ is great for strong / dense / contrasty negatives. (If you're using film negatives that is...)
BTW, don't be intimidated of silver prices, the real cost lies in paper, not silver!
As a last note: Definitely try gold-thiourea toning, untoned salt prints are kinda thin skinned / pretty vulnerable to atmospheric pollutants. (You'll get neutral / colder tones though. But a much more robust image: both in terms of longevity and dmax...)
What film / developer / paper do you use? (The more information you provide the more feedback you'll get...)
Regards,
Loris.
(Bol sans diliyorum...)
If you want a true historic answer related to Talbots original salt prints (photogenic drawings), contrast is not inherent in this process. If you use his original formulation and dry in darkness, a scan can provide what you may be looking for. But then some people on this site will probably say that I dont know what Im talking about.
would love to read talbot's writings related to his original salt prints. can you tell me if they are available to read online ?
Seeing as I am one of the people that disagrees with you. Could you elucidate on this statement a bit? Quoting the relevant passages from Talbot's notes would be a good start.
Also, bear in mind that his photogenic drawings and his calotypes were two, very different (albeit related), processes. They are not the same thing. Generally when we refer to salt-prints we are referring to the latter, rather than the former.
Relevant passages from Talbot's notes are perhaps too numerous to quote, but I would suggest you refer to Larry J Schaaf, Records of the Dawn of Photography; Talbot's Notebooks P & Q
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996). You can then back this up by actual experiments to confirm his observations. When you mention that generally when we refer to salt-prints we are referring to the latter, rather than the former. I thought calotypes were called calotypes and not salt prints. Perhaps what is in confusion here is that I am not referring to an alternative print making process, but recording the imagery as the image changes during chemical reaction. Perhaps this should be called Imageography?
Another way to increase the contrast with a regular film is to selenium tone the negative. I've made successful salt prints using Polaroid type 55 negatives toned for about 5 minutes in Kodak selenium toner diluted 1+3.
I'm beginning to think that I have to shoot and develop a negative specifically for salt prints. I'm wondering negatives for salt prints can be printed on silver gelatin paper.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?