Variables for warmtone papers

[john_s]

Were the prints framed? Might she have framed them with the glass directly on top of the print?

No, they were stored in an ordinary manilla folder among other folders of documents, i.e. not exactly an "achival" material. Not the best treatment, but my non-warm tone prints (Brovira graded) have survived such treatment without exception, at least as far as I can tell by eye. I can understand her not having framed them, since they were pictures of me. The negative is still good, though.

I have heard of the framing problem with RC prints, which seems a bit different, since the damaging chemicals are generated in the actual paper, not the surrounds.

 

[MMfoto]

I was thinking the same thing. I remember reading in Photo Techhniques several years back an article that identified a potential to accelerate image degradation when the paper was unable to beathe. However, I recall that this concern was with RC papers only.

On top of that, though obviously related, is the problem of condensation behind the glass. Depending on conditions, you'd be surprised how much moisture can build up inside the framing package. Often framed art is hung on an outside wall that is colder than the room, the heat gets turned on and off, etc, that's a big part of why breathable materials and over-matting are so important. Acrylic is a good choice, however, if the glazing absolutely has to go on top of the image.

 

[firecracker]

In the past, I had very brown prints with the old Agfa MC FB paper developed in Dektol 1:2 and toned with Kodak Sepia Toner. If you could find that paper, you might want to try that. There's nothing complicated.

 

[Ryuji]

I stocked up Agfa MCC and MCP and they are wonderful paper. Fortezo is another nice paper, though it's graded stock, and it has curling problem.

 

[Michel Hardy-Vallée]

Well, after reading all these learned comments, I'll start by doing what's easier: process the paper in Dektol 1+2, and tone in selenium half of the prints to see what the color change does. If neither makes me happy, I'll start considering alternative developers. Thank you all.

 

[Ryuji]

I suggest alternative TONER and perhaps PAPER rather than DEVELOPER. Dektol 1+2 is not bad at all. Believe me. I have my products but I'm recommending something else because I think you should chase bigger factors first.

 

[JBrunner]

I suggest alternative TONER and perhaps PAPER rather than DEVELOPER. Dektol 1+2 is not bad at all. Believe me. I have my products but I'm recommending something else because I think you should chase bigger factors first.

I agree. In my earlier post I listed my developer of choice, but I believethe results are much more a factor of the paper and toner, than my developer.

 

[Michel Hardy-Vallée]

Hm, I'm not sure what to think now. I have seen a couple of responses here arguing for developer as an important variable in controlling the final tone of the paper.

Right now I have Kentmere and Forte, so if I don't like one with Dektol, I'll see what the other one gives, but I was worried that somehow warm tone would not come out properly with either b/c of the developer.

 

[MMfoto]

I think ther's just different schools of thought here. One is that the tone of the image comes first, and the other is that permance does, but that you can get permanance and the tone you want with the correct materials. Personally, I have a developer/paper combo that gives me exactly the esthetic I'm looking for for most of my work. That said, I'd like to try some of the toner suggestion here to see if I can find a similar print color/look and gain some permanance at the same time. Though I don't look forward to the extra steps in my workflow! I've been very spoiled by my simple processing: Dev, H2O, TF-4, H2O, Dry!

 

[don sigl]

Well, after reading all these learned comments, I'll start by doing what's easier: process the paper in Dektol 1+2, and tone in selenium half of the prints to see what the color change does. If neither makes me happy, I'll start considering alternative developers. Thank you all.

I am in the middle of performing a toning/developer test. I am skeptical of the argument that dektol is a better development selection when using a warm toner. The attachments are representative of the first level of testing. These are prints made with Forte PWT. One print (The warmer one) was developed in Asco 135 that was modified by replacing the Sodium Carbonate with Potassium Carbonate. The Ansco 135 is what i've been using lately. The cooler print was developed in D-72, a very close if not identical match to dektol.

The print developed in Ansco 135 required 10% more exposure. It was processed for 2 minutes at 68F 1:1 using a #2.5 Ilford filter

The print developed in D-72 was processed for 1.5 minutes at 68F 2 parts water to 1 part developer using an Ilford #2.5 filter. These are both straight prints.

Tonight i will tone each print in Nelsons to determine if there are any differences.

BTW, the Anso print is displays more subtle gradation in the highlights than the d-72 print. The d-72 print is very nice, but has a slightly harsher look to it. This may be a subjective call, but it is one of the reasons I have steered away from Dektol.

 

[Ryuji]

I am in the middle of performing a toning/developer test. I am skeptical of the argument that dektol is a better development selection when using a warm toner.

I have repeatedly said that you can't judge or predict what you'll get after polysulfide toning by just looking at the image tone before toning. This is not an argument. It's a fact well known and published since 1930. I've confirmed this to be true with many papers and developer formulae in my own testing. You are making the mistake that I've warned here and many other places.

Also, straight D-72 is a poor choice for almost any modern printing paper. D-72 or Dektol should be used at least 1+1 or better yet 1+2 with most papers. For best toning results, the paper should be fully developed, typically 90-120 seconds with most papers.

Also it is a myth that potassium carbonate itself has warmtone effect. It only affects results via higher pH compared to sodium carbonate. Elevated pH and difference in the developer concentration are one reason why the highlight contrast is slightly different with the two prints. In many developers this will result in colder tone unless the formula or dilution is adjusted.

 

[Ryuji]

so if I don't like one with Dektol, I'll see what the other one gives, but I was worried that somehow warm tone would not come out properly with either b/c of the developer.

Again, if you don't get desired warm tone after toning from a print developed in Dektol 1+2 for full 2 minutes, the chance of getting what you want by changing the developer is TINY. If that's the case, it's a sign that you need to work on the toning technique or switch paper.

A lot of people exaggerate their experience with things they played around, especially in the context of bashing classic choices like D-76 or Dektol, but I'd look at them with a glassful of salt unless considerable difference exists in the chemical formula and actual chemical mechanism. You should distinguish small effects and big effects. You want to get close to what you want by tweaking big effect variables before messing with anything else.

 

[Michel Hardy-Vallée]

Again, if you don't get desired warm tone after toning from a print developed in Dektol 1+2 for full 2 minutes, the chance of getting what you want by changing the developer is TINY. If that's the case, it's a sign that you need to work on the toning technique or switch paper.

I'll take your word for it, given that I have yet to get dirty and do some prints. My basic concern was that I've seen over and again Dektol being described as a "cold tone" developer, so I wasn't sure whether this was a good first choice of developer. I just want to figure out some principles to guide my experimentations.

So I shall expose these sheets of paper and in Dektol (or maybe Polymax if I'm printing at my parents' during Christmas) shall I bathe them to reveal them! I'll report some time between here and next year.

 

[don sigl]

I have repeatedly said that you can't judge or predict what you'll get after polysulfide toning by just looking at the image tone before toning. This is not an argument. It's a fact well known and published since 1930. I've confirmed this to be true with many papers and developer formulae in my own testing. You are making the mistake that I've warned here and many other places.

Also, straight D-72 is a poor choice for almost any modern printing paper. D-72 or Dektol should be used at least 1+1 or better yet 1+2 with most papers. For best toning results, the paper should be fully developed, typically 90-120 seconds with most papers.

Also it is a myth that potassium carbonate itself has warmtone effect. It only affects results via higher pH compared to sodium carbonate. Elevated pH and difference in the developer concentration are one reason why the highlight contrast is slightly different with the two prints. In many developers this will result in colder tone unless the formula or dilution is adjusted.

I suggest that you reread my last post. First, I diluted the D-72 1:2 and processed for 1.5 minutes. I am very familiar with the proper use of this developer. Second, the post states that I am in the middle of the test. Completion would involve toning both prints in Nelson's and comparing the results. Third, The the substitution of potassium bromide is not a muth. I have done the tests and can see the difference as a warming effect.
Of course elevated PH will result in an increase in contrast. It may have been possible to bring the D-72 print down a little with split development. As I stated, the difference is slight (less than half a grade). I also stated that the look may be subjective on my part, but in my opinion, the d72 print looks a little harsher.

I have toned both prints and will be posting the results later today.

Again, read through what I have to say before you provide comment.

 

[Ryuji]

My basic concern was that I've seen over and again Dektol being described as a "cold tone" developer, so I wasn't sure whether this was a good first choice of developer.

Dektol is a neutral developer, not particularly cold at all. But anyway, these categorizations apply only to the untoned image hue and they don't apply to the tone image hue. Some warmtone developers make VERY COLD black when toned in polysulfide or selenium. Some warmtone developers make very weak image lacking good tonality after toning. Very few print developers that produce warm untoned image are good for toning applications, if you want strong brown black images. Many people think about this like mixing paints, warm + warm = warmer/better. This line of amateurish arguments don't hold and I don't recommend them. The mechanism of making toned image color is based on chemical change and optical interaction with the silver, and this is very different from usual color theory that works with mixing pigments or multilayer color photographic materials.

Combination of warmtone developer and polysulfide toner often makes colder tone, or weak yellow orange image lacking good tonality, depending on the formulation of the warmtone developer. For example, some people suggest to add extra KBr to diluted Dektol to make a warmtone developer. This type of MQ or PQ developers containing lots of KBr generally produce colder black when toned in polysulfide. Some warmtone developers are hydroquinone-only developers that require 4-10 minutes to develop images. These developers often make most pleasing warmtone image before toning, but once you tone the image in polysulfide, the image often turns into ugly yellowish color and often the tonality becomes unpleasantly distorted. Many "warm tone" developers are not too dissimilar to standard MQ or PQ formulations but vary only slightly in a few ingredients, or may use glycin or other obsolete agents. These may make slight difference, but as long as the other factors like KBr, pH and developer concentrations are within reasonable range, the difference is small, and this kind of difference can be easily absorbed by small adjustment in the toning technique, such as toner dilution and toning time. So, I don't consider any of these routes to be fruitful. The key factor producing these differences is the microscopic structure of the silver grains that you can't see without using electron microscope.

The formula of Silvergrain Tektol Standard developer is optimized for toning applications but Dektol 1+2 isn't bad at all.

 

[Michel Hardy-Vallée]

Ryuji, thanks a lot for the explanations, I have not been able to find such info around: I see a lot of people posting their recipes, but I'm interested in understanding how image tone works rather than aping other people's work.

Guess I should buy Tim Rudman's book, eh?

 

[Ryuji]

Tim Rudman's toning book is excellent but I am not sure if he goes into this kind of information, which is very useful for people who do systematic tests to find best solution, but most average people don't think like you and I do. One of the well known experts in this area is Ira Current, who was for many years in charge of testing paper emulsions and quality control at Ansco. He published several excellent papers from 40s to 60s. I studied those papers very closely and also contacted Mr Current for many questions and clarification, because the test materials differ between then and today. But surprisingly, in my independent tests, I get very same results as what he published decades ago for the influence of various factors on toned image hue. I've summarized what I think is important in previous posts as well as my web site, and everything I know went into consideration in making my developers.

One thing that is pity is that toning is a LOT less common than in 1950s, when almost every portrait photographer had his signature toner solution. So besides Tim's books and my online scribbles you won't find much more info. People don't even know Ira Current, for example, who was once very well known among technically competent photographers. (Well, I'm not that old so I'm learning all these through publications, memoirs of key industrial people and conversations with the elders.)

But then what's tricky is the mechanism part. The hue of silver image is one of the least understood part of b&w emulsion and processing chemistry. This is partly because emulsion chemists, processing chemists, artists and conservation scientists rarely had in depth discussion of this aspect together. These people speak VERY different languages and they have very different approaches. But the major pieces of building blocks existed from 50s to 80s, including works done by big shots from Kodak, Polaroid (including Land himself), and several other companies. For someone like me, it's easy to make sense of their work together as a whole, but this is the kind of things I never saw written comprehensively in literature. For example, people like Current wouldn't discuss the effect from emulsion chemistry on image effects, while emulsion chemists wouldn't discuss toning, or an integral process of artwork production. Anyway, the short message is that there is a LOT of knowledge that is not found in books, sadly.

Another sad part is that those who know the stuff are old today, if still alive. I was REALLY (happily) surprised when I learned that Ira Current used email. But in many cases, this is getting into the zone where I have to cross check written reports from the past, informal information from the elders and do independent tests, before accepting a piece of old knowledge to be valid today.

 

[Will S]

Do hydroquinine warmtone developers (like Ilford Warmtone) have the same problems with print permanence that are described above for warmtone developers in general?

Given that Ilford WT developed in Ilford WT but then toned in selenium goes cooler I'm wondering if it is acceptable to NOT tone this paper/dev combination and still have the prints last?

Thanks,

Will

 

[Ryuji]

It's not that warmtone developers have a problem. ALL untoned silver images are susceptible to environmental oxidants and other harmful fumes, so all important prints should be toned. It's just that warmtone images are more susceptible.

My preferred solution would be to use polysulfide toner to achieve the brown you want. This will protect the image as well. But if you are going to tone in selenium anyway, then I don't know why you want to use warmtone developer.

The next best solution is to use Fuji Ag Guard, but this product is only available in Japan. Other non-toning options are problematic and I don't recommend them.

 

[Michel Hardy-Vallée]

Ryuji, is Kodak Brown Toner similar to a polysulfide toner?

 

[Will S]

Thanks very much to everyone on this thread! I don't believe I have ever read anything about toning for warmtone other than in connection with sepia toning. This has been a most informative conversation.

Kodak sells a T-8 toner (or used to) that I think is being polysulfide, but I'm not sure. I know I've seen it at photoformulary.com Does anyone have any thoughts on hypo-alum sepia toner which I think is not as brown as polysulfide?

Thanks,

Will

 

[Ryuji]

Kodak Brown Toner is a polysulfide toner.

Hypo-alum is another sulfiding brown toner but polysulfide toner is easier to get good results in my experience. The only advantage of hypo-alum over polysulfide is that it doesn't smell bad like polysulfide does.

 

[don sigl]

OK here's the test I ran comparing toning prints developed in Dektol and modified Ansco 135. It was stated in this thread that when using warm toners it is best to use a developer like Dektol over a warm tone developer. I have been printing on Forte PWT for about 11 years. I generally use warm tone developers with it. Invariably I tone with Nelsons Gold Toner, which is a warm tone toner that contains AuCl as well as silver nitrate, Ammonium persulfate, NaCl and sodium Thiosulfate. This toner is capable of producing very warm tones on most papers (but not all). It also has the ability to increase contrast and dmax of the print. This is not your average warm tone toner.

The stats on the prints:
film: Foma 400 120
Film developer: Pyrocat
Paper: Forte PWT
Paper developers: D72, Modified Ansco 135 (Substitute Potassium carbonate)
Toner Nelsons Gold Toner

The prints were developed in each developer to closley match contrast and density. I visually matched a highlight, midtone, and shadow density. The prints were straight prints. No manipulation. The Asco print was warmer than the D72 print. Subjectively, I felt the D72 print was a little harsher But the difference was very slight.

The prints were then toned in Nelsons for 5 minutes at 110F. The results show a warmer look with the Ansco print. Density and contrast is virtually identical between the 2 prints. In reality, I could probably have matched the color as well, by increasing the toning time of the D72 print or decreasing the toning time of the Ansco print. Nelsons will give a range of tones starting as early as 30 seconds and going up to 20 minutes.

This test indicates that for this paper/toner combination, there is no density advantage to using D72 over Ansco 135 when printing.

I have used most warm toners, including sepia, polysulfide, and thiourea based. I much prefer the Nelsons over any of them. It provides the increased depth that you can get from gold toning while offering a range of warm tones.

The order of the examples left to right:
Untoned D72 print
Toned D72 print
untoned Ansco 135 print
Toned Ansco135 print

 

[don sigl]

BTW, I studied under Ira Current at RIT. Also, John Compton and Les Strobel.

 

[Michel Hardy-Vallée]

Don, your results are very nice, and like you I especially like the 135+toner. One thing they make clear to me is that if someone does not tone, the variation in developer alone is small. Existing, but small. The toner seems to build up on this variation, and the two toned print have a much greater difference to me than the untoned one.