Wet Plate Collodion Questions

[RobertP]

oh by the way.....My pours got worse the emptier that bottle got.

 

[Photo Engineer]

The Formulary sells readymade collodion.

IMHO, one of the worlds foremost experts on collodion among other older processes is Mark Osterman from George Eastman House. Contact with him or one of their other conservators might be of some help to you getting reference material or information.

PE

 

[schrochem]

Smieglitz, thanks for the added information on the process and why not to dip. I plan to send off for Coffer's set tomorrow. Also, thanks for the plate on Daniel (another apuger's work I enjoy). It was interesting to hear about the variables with the salts. I'll also admit that I'm not exactly concerned with period accuracy, but rather I'd like to explore the possibilities of the process. Which this thread has really gotten me excited!

 

[RobertP]

PE, Yes I know Mark and France. I think John made mention that they were students of his at one time or they worked together in some capacity . John just lives 90 miles south of them.

 

[mark]

Hey RObert,

Why is the plate backward? Is that normal or was it a mistake in the scanning?

 

[RobertP]

That is normal. It is a direct positive. Now if I was making a glass plate negative to print albumen the writing would be turned the right way on the albumen print. Or if you drink enough of it it will read properly.

 

[Neil Miller]

Scott - you can also have a look at Robert Szabo's forum (been around a long time) for answers to a lot of questions:

http://www.cwreenactors.com/phorum/

Also, George Berkhofer's manual is precise, plain-speaking and debunks a lot of the myths asociated with the process:

http://www.collodionart.com/

Mark - the reason is that a collodion positive is, in fact, a thin negative. The dark background (or dark glass) makes it appear as a positive - you can sometimes see the same effect with thin film negatives held against a dark background when the light glances across them.

Regards,
Neil

 

[mark]

So,

Is it like a neg and can be viewed from the opposite side, and, in Robert's case, be read correctly?

The main reason for me to want to learn this was a series has been beating around in my head and this medium will suit it well. But there will be things with writing. I find the backward writing to be distracting and ultimately detracting from what would be a nice image.

 

[RobertP]

Daguerrotypes, ambrotypes, and ferrotypes are all direct postive photographs. They can't be viewed from the other side. About the only way around this would probably be to shoot into a mirror.

 

[mark]

Well, doing that series this way is out. Oh well the portrait project is still in.

 

[schrochem]

Ahhh...that explains the backward tats on some of Prifti's recent plates.

With the trophy aluminum, is .025 the thicker size being talked about?
Is just aluminum bought or is a color such as black bought?
Thanks

Scott

 

[RobertP]

It is the gloss black color you want. Yes, but you can use the thinner .020 stock for small plates. I think the coating on the aluminum is a black backed on enamel. But I'm not really sure.

 

[Neil Miller]

Ambrotype on clear glass....

Regards,
Neil

 

[mark]

I don't understand your post Neil.

By the way thanks for posting the link to the forum. It has been pretty interesting reading.

 

[schrochem]

Neil thanks for the response. I had found the cnreenactors but not George's. Your response to Mark was intriguing. I thought I had read that the developing or fixing was different if you were going to do a positive or a negative. Or did I miss something?
I remembered something I saw in one of Quinn's YouTube Movies. He makes a negative but at the end (1:50) he shows the positive by putting it up to black cloth. So is a glass positive just the negative done on black glass? I suppose the negative could be displayed as a positive by mounting it against a dark background.

Scott

Scott - you can also have a look at Robert Szabo's forum (been around a long time) for answers to a lot of questions:

http://www.cwreenactors.com/phorum/

Also, George Berkhofer's manual is precise, plain-speaking and debunks a lot of the myths asociated with the process:

http://www.collodionart.com/

Mark - the reason is that a collodion positive is, in fact, a thin negative. The dark background (or dark glass) makes it appear as a positive - you can sometimes see the same effect with thin film negatives held against a dark background when the light glances across them.

Regards,
Neil

 

[Neil Miller]

Mark - sorry if it was a bit cryptic - I was referring to RobertP's post - an ambrotype on clear glass can be viewed from the other side. Darkly coloured glass (eg deep purple) was used as an alternative to a dark backing, like black cloth or velvet, or - in some cases - as a black coating on the collodion itself.

BTW, Robert Szabo's forum goes back quite a way, even before the current forum that is hosted. Most of the big names you hear about such as George Berkhofer, John Hurlock and Mark Ostermann have posted on it along with with others who have probably forgotten more about WP than most know such as Ray Morgenweck and Bob Szabo himself.

Regards,
Neil

PS: as an aside I once read something about Billy the Kid being lefthanded, then somebody pointed out that the photo of him holding his weapon in his left hand was obviously reversed due to the photographic method at the time. Might be apocryphal, but interesting.

 

[RobertP]

It is done the same on clear glass as it is on black glass. Only the black glass needs no backing. Now I have never seen a clear ambrotype that was backed on the collodion side with black cloth. That would reverse the image. Quinn is backing it on opposite side of the collodion. An ambrotype is just an underexposed negative. Normally when done on clear glass the back side is coated with asphaltum or a more modern method is to spray it with glossy black lacquer spray paint.

 

[Neil Miller]

Hi Scott,

I was really replying to RobertP - timelag!

There is a very fine cut-off point when a glass plate ceases to be of use as an ambrotype and is of more value as a negative. You can have heavy ambrotypes and light negs. So you surmise correctly - it's the dark backing that reverses it, but if you are a fine technician like Quinn, you will have made your ambrotype to a suitable density in the first place.

Usually, like you say, a change in technique and developing is called for if you are going for one or the other, but - we all make mistakes! If I get something usable and it looks good as an ambrotype but is too light for a negative, then I'm happy to have an ambrotype. You can tell that I'm not much of a technician.

Regards,
Neil.

 

[RobertP]

Neil I'll give it a try on one of my clear ambros.

 

[RobertP]

Neil. I just tried it on my clear ambros with a dense black velvet. It does work but the quality of the image seems degraded when I put the black cloth against the collodion side. But to some that may be acceptable.

 

[Neil Miller]

The technique is the same, Robert, I agree. The point is that you can see through the clear glass whereas obviously seeing through black glass is going to be problematic. Not that I've ever seen a period one on black glass, just clear, purple and ruby. But I have seen them reversed quite often - maybe some old-time punters didn't like their wedding rings on the wrong hands, or whatever. I've seen quite a few coated with asphaltum on the collodion side, too - more's the pity - once the asphaltum flakes/breaks down/becomes damaged, salvaging is hard if not impossible. If coated on the clear side, this wouldn't present a problem.

Regards,
Neil.

 

[schrochem]

I was rewatching Robb Kendrick's Video and noticed the varnishing seemed to add some warmth the the plate. I have seen that lavender varnish mentioned a few times. Is that a step that can adjust tone?
Seeing these videos isn't helping my patience.......

 

[RobertP]

You can take a light negative and intensify it to the density that is required for albumen printing or Pt/Pd what ever suits you. When shooting for a negative you would double or even triple your exposure time as compared to an ambrotype. You then would develop three times longer than your development time for an ambrotype. At least this is how Coffer taught me. Even then you may need to intensify the negative to build enough density. Sometimes you nail right without intensification.

 

[RobertP]

Scott, The lavender varnish smells great when you're varnishing. But Talk with other wetplaters most use an alcohol lamp or oil lamp to dry and or warm the plate for varnishing .Kendrick may just be a little impatient with this step and he feels that a blow torch (propane torch) is faster. He is the only one I know of that uses one. Some people just wait until they get home to varnish and use a hair dryer. But most use an alcohol or oil lamp.

 

[Neil Miller]

Scott - I think that the varnish is just a protective layer, especially for negatives that come into contact with paper in printing frames. Sometimes, plates were left unvarnished ("in the bright"), but I suppose they were ambrotypes, adequately protected by mat, cover glass and preserver.

Robert - that is undoubtedly correct. But I am acutely aware - maybe paranoid - about the uniqueness of each shot, and I (over-)compensate for it for taking up to three different exposures, hence I get a range of images that include ambro, ambro/neg and neg. I just hate the fact that I might have only one image and, being the butterfingers I am, damage it. I should get it right first time of course, but then again if I could do that I wouldn't be dabbling in photography - I would have done what dear old dad wanted, got it right, and would now be languishing on a beach somewhere...!

Regards,
Neil.