Solarizing a print

[tkamiya]

I have an image I'd like to solarize.

Is the process in general, process the print as normal and during the development phase, toward the end, BRIEFLY flash it with light? I really didn't find much on this process. If anyone has a better instructions or link to it, I'd appreciate sharing.

Thanks.

 

[cliveh]

I have an image I'd like to solarize.

Is the process in general, process the print as normal and during the development phase, toward the end, BRIEFLY flash it with light? I really didn't find much on this process. If anyone has a better instructions or link to it, I'd appreciate sharing.

Thanks.

For a detailed response the following is probably the definitive source -

http://www.cchem.berkeley.edu/wljeme/SOUTLINE.html

But to get you there quick, refer to page 16 of 16 - Getting aquainted with the technique.

 

[Bob Carnie]

I agree about William Jolly , all my work has been to his notes.
I solarize both print and negative. PE welcome to jump in here and state what we do is not solarization.

Metol, sodium sulfite, sodium carbonate, sodium bromide for the first dev
Potassium Bromide flood for the second developer if you want a more funkier toning solution.

I flash half way between the development two minutes in first -- put print in second dev-- flash-- process out as normal , stop fix wash exactly as normal
I have a permanent flashing unit hooked to a timer which gives more or less power with a stop system.. the flash is set at a distance to be able to easily flash 30 x40 prints.
I adjust the power based on the size of the prints.

I also use this same system now for my 8x10 negatives , I do two at a time and flash half way between the developer. for film I do not use a Potassium Bromide charge.
Also slight under exposure of the original scene works well. The camera image is recent and is a negative solarization, I am using an 100yr old studio 8x10 camera with hot lights and for table top work have a f22 four steamboat exposure.

This is really one of the most enjoyable processes I have ever done and it is my long term goal to keep making these kinds of prints for show work.

I have an image I'd like to solarize.

Is the process in general, process the print as normal and during the development phase, toward the end, BRIEFLY flash it with light? I really didn't find much on this process. If anyone has a better instructions or link to it, I'd appreciate sharing.

Thanks.

 

[tkamiya]

Holy cow.... this is an involved process.... thanks everybody.

 

[Bob Carnie]

but kick ass

 

[tkamiya]

The article says to use a specialized developer or in the past, well-used Dektol was used. Hum.... Is it even possible to play around with this procedure with fresh Dektol?

The only paper developers I have handy are Dektol and Ilford Warm Tone.

 

[Bob Carnie]

You can play around and waste paper, but you really are looking for a Metol agent developer. The mix is very easy , if Ian pumps in I think it maybe very close to the Selectol Soft developer...

IMO mix from Mr Jollys great formulas and you will have fun and not need the round paper basket as much.

The article says to use a specialized developer or in the past, well-used Dektol was used. Hum.... Is it even possible to play around with this procedure with fresh Dektol?

The only paper developers I have handy are Dektol and Ilford Warm Tone.

 

[tkamiya]

This is getting expensive....

 

[Bob Carnie]

Scratch Chemistry is way cheaper than pre packaged, and it is very rewarding .

You need to find a good chemical supplier in Florida or one of the Southern States and purchase wisely.

This is getting expensive....

 

[kevs]

Hi Tkamiya,

There's an extensive article on the Sabatier effect here: http://unblinkingeye.com/Articles/Solarization/solarization.html

Have fun,
kevs

 

[Photo Engineer]

Cross processing, color and Sabattier.

I have a set of cross processed Sabattier effect prints in my gallery and they are color. Nothing is simpler. Just flash during development. With B&W prints it should be white light and with color it can be white light or colored lights. Use normal development and flash about 3/4 of the way through.

BTW, I stick to the "real" name of Sabattier effect. This is not to put anyone down, but with the loss of all analog science and scientists looming on the horizon, in the future how will anyone really know what is being talked about if terms are corrupted? In fact, the change (or corruption) in nomenclature that happened in the early part of the 20th century is what causes a lot of confusion here and elsewhere regarding analog photography. I could give dozens of examples of this, but don't worry, I won't!

And so, Solarization is done in-camera and Sabattier effect is done during processing. They look quite different.

There is a long thread here that discusses methods in detail.

PE

 

[tkamiya]

I've been reading up on this subject.

Two questions:

Looks like Ansco 120 is very similar in composition to the developer described by Prof. William Jolly. This will work to get me started, right? I'm not against buying raw chemicals but at this point, I'd like a one package solution.

Most articles talk about a fixed grade paper by Agfa. Can I get by with any of Ilford's current products? I have MGIV FB and WT readily available.

(ok, so there are 3 questions) I understand I'd print really contrasty, like grade 4 or 5. But what kind of guideline do I use to expose this? Favor highlight or shadow? (or neither since some of it get reversed?)

 

[tkamiya]

I think an article KEVS pointed to answers few of my questions above. Thanks!

 

[removed account4]

hi taka

i have never seen that article before just now, wow, who knew it was as involved as it is !

whenever i solarize things ( i don't do it very much ) i just use spent developer so you can control
the process a bit more than more active fresh developer. ( its like processing a paper negative ) ...
i don't have any examples of what i did but it involved developing about until the print started to come out
then squeegeeing off some of the developer, putting it back under the enlargeer ( red filter is great for aligning it )
and burning in the areas i wanted solarized ...
then back in the developer, the spent bath and if it needed a boost into regular developer and a water bath
to slow it down a little ..
i used to do this sometimes for "hot" areas that just would never burn down, no matter what i did .. this worked pretty well ..
not really as involved as others , but fun just the same

just experiment a little and take notes

have fun !

john

 

[Roger Cole]

I've been reading up on this subject.

Two questions:

Looks like Ansco 120 is very similar in composition to the developer described by Prof. William Jolly. This will work to get me started, right? I'm not against buying raw chemicals but at this point, I'd like a one package solution.

Most articles talk about a fixed grade paper by Agfa. Can I get by with any of Ilford's current products? I have MGIV FB and WT readily available.

(ok, so there are 3 questions) I understand I'd print really contrasty, like grade 4 or 5. But what kind of guideline do I use to expose this? Favor highlight or shadow? (or neither since some of it get reversed?)

Why not just buy the Solarol developer? Expensive, but it's used diluted 1+1 or 1+2, and it would seem the way to get started.

Dead Link Removed

http://www.freestylephoto.biz/151264-Solarol-Developer

Also he says that Selectol Soft is pretty similar, and a lot cheaper:

http://www.freestylephoto.biz/75071...t-Paper-Developer-to-Make-1-Gallon?cat_id=301

 

[Newt_on_Swings]

Ah I played with this a bit in the past and everything came out terrible lol. I could never get the mackie lines to be very apparent. Maybe I'll do a few this week.

Also on a relevant note, one of the books I was flipping through suggested to do a test strip grid across first for the main exposure, then crosswise for the 2nd reexposure to quickly help show the various levels of the sabattier effect.

 

[Bob Carnie]

If Ansco 120 is Metol agent only and close to the components I listed then I would say give it a go,
Yes all of my Solarizations are on Ilford Warmtone or Hannamuhle Art 300.

I favor a grade 4 filter starting point or 100 Magenta. ** I use condenser and diffusion enlargers for this.
For me the secret is to make a normal looking density on the paper in the first dev.
I like the print to be lighter by about 1/3 stop. Then I move to the second developer and flash.
You will get consistent results if you work exactly the same way, and time yourself so the flash is turned on at the right time.
I use a 2-4 second flash and I make sure the print is fully soaked in the second developer with no bubbles on the surface and flash.

I like to do the full development as the results are unfolding before your eyes and you will be tempted to pull the print early but for repeatability I do full process.
basically your whites and blacks start moving towards each other so when you are making your first tests just pretend you are making a light print in your first dev. It will be a grade 4 light print but the dev is softer than Dektol so it balances out that you can determine quite easily the proper starting point with one or two exposures.

The lighter the initial exposure the more reversal or effect, the darker the initial exposure , the more real the effect.
There fore with Dodging and Burning you can create some really amazing prints.
Post some of your results and have fun

I've been reading up on this subject.

Two questions:

Looks like Ansco 120 is very similar in composition to the developer described by Prof. William Jolly. This will work to get me started, right? I'm not against buying raw chemicals but at this point, I'd like a one package solution.

Most articles talk about a fixed grade paper by Agfa. Can I get by with any of Ilford's current products? I have MGIV FB and WT readily available.

(ok, so there are 3 questions) I understand I'd print really contrasty, like grade 4 or 5. But what kind of guideline do I use to expose this? Favor highlight or shadow? (or neither since some of it get reversed?)

 

[tkamiya]

I'll have to give this a go....

 

[tkamiya]

I am a bit confused....

All articles talk about the first developer and the second developer. Are these the same developer with Metol? (I think they are?)

Also, is it that develop in first dev, put it in the second dev, FLASH? Then why two trays? Can I not just keep it in the same solution, bring it up to the surface and FLASH half way through the process?

 

[Photo Engineer]

You only need one developer if you are flashing during processing. IDK what anyone else may do, but the traditional method uses only one developer. Some people may use 2 developers to get special add on effects, but that is not necessary when you are starting out. You should try the basics first.

PE

 

[tkamiya]

Michael,

I'd rather prefer using what I already have. However, all the docs refereed to in this thread leads me to Metol only developers. People who used Dektol deliberately degraded it by passing air or nearly exhausted it before using it for this purpose. I further read using Dektol this way leads to unreliable and un-reproducible results. The first link provided in this thread was particularly interesting as it shows how this Metol only developer was developed.

This is why I'm taking this route.

(yes, this is getting expensive!)

 

[Roger Cole]

If you read the article linked about, references to first and second developers and development refer only to the development before flashing (first) and after (second) even though they are usually the same developer and usually in the same tray. In fact he specifically recommends against removing the print to flash it.

 

[tkamiya]

I'll just setup so that I can use my second enlarger as "flasher" then. (don't worry, I'm fully aware of water-electricity thing)

 

[tkamiya]

Michael,

Please see post #8 where Bob basically told me to not bother with Dektol.

 

[tkamiya]

This is interesting....

I just priced out the cost of chemicals buying from B&H (which sells Photographer's formulary stuff) and it came out to about $50 for tens of gallons worth of the developer mentioned in the note.

So this is definitely a "GO".

I'm sure there are cheaper way of getting raw ingredients but for small qty, this is easier. (and still cheaper)

Is this formula expected to last a while in tightly capped bottles? Or is this basically mix what you use today kind of thing?