Which starting point process would you recommend?

[ChristopherCoy]

It's been brought to my attention that I have a great lack of knowledge when it comes to "alternative processes." (I've recently learned that this is a misnomer because they weren't considered "alternative" until Kodak labeled them as such).

In any event, I had a goal of doing platinum/palladium printing, but apparently had no clue how much that was going to cost me, or how difficult it may be to obtain the resolution I need to make a satisfactory print.

Cyanotype's have been recommended time and time again, but I never had an interest in looking at or producing them because of my dislike of the blue tones. And then Matt kindly showed me that they could be toned into different colors.

So my question is this - which one (or two) of the 'alternative processes' would you recommend for someone with no alt process experience?

- I don't like the blue in cyanotypes, or other colors... I prefer mostly black and white (I'm not even that crazy about sepia)
- I would prefer something that is relatively inexpensive since this is the learning stage
- I prefer something with fairly decent rendering with good detail, nothing that produces very abstract images
- I also prefer something that doesn't require a lot of equipment for mixing, or storage, and is forgiving as far as temperatures and beginners mistakes go.

Thanks in advance!

(I have plans to obtain the Alternative Process book as soon as finances allow. It's an expensive book!)

 

[BrianShaw]

http://www.alternativephotography.com/beyond-the-blues-vandyke-brown-printing/

 

[nmp]

Before you get that book, go to the link posted above and get a lot of free info about every process under the sun:

Now about your query, seems to me it will be difficult if not impossible to come up with a single process that meets all your criteria.

Criterion #1 (Neutral Tone): Toned cyanotypes (all kind of possibilities but a true neutral tone may be difficult), Pt-Pd with a specific ratio of Pt and Pd and particular developers that can give colder or more neutral tones, palladium-only based ziatypes, gum printing with black pigment, carbon printing with black pigment, silver based processes like salt, albumen, kallitype, VDB toned with gold that will give more neutral prints in general than the untoned which will be various shades of the brown/orange.

Criterion #2 (Cost): Most of the above involving precious metals are out but if you afford silver nitrate, it opens up a lot of options. Cyanotypes, gum, carbon remaining.

Criterion #3 (Details): Gum is out as it tends to be less detailed, although there are some masters like Keith Taylor who can prove that wrong. Carbon is the best for this limited only by the negative sharpness. Cyanotypes if printed on a glossy substrate like fixed out silver gelatin or glass that can give better details than on a matte water color paper.

Criterion #4 (Process Simplicity): Carbon is out as it is the most difficult of whole lot with all kinds of precise control and methodology to get the final result - although it can be the most spectacular of all. Generic cyanotypes are relatively simple (they are not easy if best control, quality, as consistency are required as I am learning) but printing on a glossy surface will involve another level of difficulty.

So where does that leave you?

(this is not an exhaustive list by any means....just a general idea as to what you are up against.)

:Niranjan.

 

[ChristopherCoy]

I was just reading the Alternative site.

I think at this point I'm probably putting the cart before the horse. I need to try the cost efficient cyanotype method and put my dislikes aside. This will teach me a few things like how to perfect my digital negatives, how to adjust UV exposures, and how to perfect my contact printing processes.

If I truly don't like cyanotypes, or toned cyanotypes, WHEN I get sufficiently good at all the other aspects of contact printing, then I can move on to something more advanced like Platinum or Palladium.

 

[nmp]

I was just reading the Alternative site.

I think at this point I'm probably putting the horse before the cart. I need to try the cost efficient cyanotype method and put my dislikes aside. This will teach me a few things like how to perfect my digital negatives, how to adjust UV exposures, and how to perfect my contact printing processes.

If I truly don't like cyanotypes, or toned cyanotypes, WHEN I get sufficiently good at all the other aspects of contact printing, then I can move on to something more advanced like Platinum or Palladium.

Wise choice, that would have been my recommendation too. Before going over to the Pt-Pd, you can try salt prints that are poor person's alternative.

:Niranjan

 

[Vaughn]

I highly recommend using in-camera negatives. Learning Pt/pd with 4x5 negatives is not very expensive...the cost keeps one careful and thoughtful!
Just another country heard from...

 

[ChristopherCoy]

I highly recommend using in-camera negatives. Learning Pt/pd with 4x5 negatives is not very expensive...the cost keeps one careful and thoughtful!
Just another country heard from...

That would require the purchase of a 4x5 camera unfortunately. I’d love to have another one but I’m
Afraid that’s still at least a year away.

 

[NedL]

Salt prints, kallitypes ( probably ziatype, not sure ) can be toned to very nice neutral blacks with platinum, and even though the initial cost of platinum is high, the cost per print is not much at all. As you go ahead and make prints it's possible that you will discover things you like that you don't know about now. I started with salt prints thinking I would "graduate" on to other things but as I made the prints, my taste changed, I started seeing what was beautiful about them, and never seriously went on to anything else ( besides playing around here and there, but not with concentrated effort ). I haven't had much time lately but when I find a good chunk of time to devote to photography again, it will be to make more salt prints.

 

[removed account4]

hi Christopher !!

I would get a copy of Christopher James' book
https://www.amazon.com/Book-Alternative-Photographic-Processes/dp/1285089316
its not too expensive and worth every penny !!

It has info on the processes and the negatives you need and the recipes for the toners and everything you can imagine for cyanotype (and everything else under the sun!). Personally, I would go for the cyanotype its a piece of cake, benign as chemistry goes ( rusty water is the rinse off ) and you can remove some of the blue tone with baking soda and water and use regular old tea or coffee or dektol &c. its a process that costs very little and the results are so satisfying its frightening . Oh, the ingredients to make it are super cheep.

 

[ChristopherCoy]

hi Christopher !!

I would get a copy of Christopher James' book
https://www.amazon.com/Book-Alternative-Photographic-Processes/dp/1285089316
its not too expensive and worth every penny !!

I can’t seem to find it anywhere for less than $100!

I found a website that sells the pdf version but that sounds a little shady.

 

[removed account4]

weird, brand new it is less than $60

 

[nmp]

I can’t seem to find it anywhere for less than $100!

I found a website that sells the pdf version but that sounds a little shady.

You can find a free copy of some chapters from his website itself. I think these are first edition versions.

https://www.christopherjames-studio.com/build/sampleChap3rdEd.html

Cyanotype is one of them.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

Another vote for the Christopher James book because it's a good survey of all the processes. When I decided to jump into alt process, I went straight to Platinum/Palladium because I knew that was what I wanted, and doing something else would be a disappointment. So I mustered up the budget and went slowly. If you're doing digital negatives, then what size camera you shoot with doesn't really matter. Regardless of the process you choose to start with, I'd still limit your digital negatives in size to under 5x7, as it will give you prints that are still satisfying to look at, but easy (and less expensive) to make. You will get lots of opinions on which method of coating to use - rod or brush. Theoretically rods are more economical because the glass doesn't really absorb any chemistry, so you can use less and you don't have to coat an area much bigger than your negative. IMHO, rods are harder to use because you have to get the chemistry very evenly distributed along the length of the rod - if you don't, you'll have incomplete coverage and you'll waste an entire batch of chemistry. Not so horrible when you're doing cyanotypes, but big time sucky when you're doing platinum or one of the other more expensive processes.

Also, be aware that a digital negative is really only good for one specific process - the negative you make for a platinum print will not make a good cyanotype or albumen, and vice versa. The upside is that once you have your base file prepared, you can make multiple versions for each process. To get a handle on making the negatives, I'd recommend watching the video on the Bostick & Sullivan website and using some pre-made curves. They may not be perfect for your circumstances, but they'll work and give you more than acceptable results the first time.

Before you buy a single chemical or piece of paper, I'd take some time to look at a lot of prints in person if possible to see the actual finished products in person- looking at reproductions in books is not ideal, and looking at reproductions online is even less ideal - you lose the paper texture and the exact color of the finished print never reproduces 100% accurately.

I know you said you don't want to tone prints (specifically cyanotypes) but that's part of the whole alt process rabbit hole - once you've moved away from a finished photo that is made with mass-produced components, you're completely liberated with what you can do to manipulate the finished product - you can print on highly textured papers, you can do multiple layers of different processes (gum over cyanotype/platinum/whatever, toned cyanotypes, toned kallitypes, toned van dyke browns) and you can experiment with various things to push the color where you want it to go. An entire world of creativity has been opened to you.

 

[ChristopherCoy]

If any of you aren't aware, Mike Ware just update the Cyanomicon book for 2020. Free download too!

https://www.mikeware.co.uk/downloads/Cyanomicon.pdf

 

[ChristopherCoy]

. An entire world of creativity has been opened to you.

A world I didn't even know existed! I have always thought "alternative processes" were something kinda 'out there', for people who weren't really looking for true photographs, but rather to distort them and make significantly abstract work. I had no idea that they are actually the predecessors to the processes we know today.

As long as I can have a portrait that is clear, and detailed I'm good. And I don't mean sharpness, I just mean that I want to be able to distinguish the petals of a flower and things like that.

 

[awty]

I had similar aspirations and started with Vandyke Brown, is relatively cheap and easy process. Looks great as is but tones very well with gold theo.
Check out Sandy Kings tutorial https://sandykingphotography.com/resources/technical-writing/vandyke

I will stick with VDB, as it does what I want and I dont see much that attracts me to the more complex and expensive contact printing processes.

 

[removed account4]

Another vote for the Christopher James book because it's a good survey of all the processes. When I decided to jump into alt process, I went straight to Platinum/Palladium because I knew that was what I wanted, and doing something else would be a disappointment. So I mustered up the budget and went slowly. If you're doing digital negatives, then what size camera you shoot with doesn't really matter. Regardless of the process you choose to start with, I'd still limit your digital negatives in size to under 5x7, as it will give you prints that are still satisfying to look at, but easy (and less expensive) to make. You will get lots of opinions on which method of coating to use - rod or brush. Theoretically rods are more economical because the glass doesn't really absorb any chemistry, so you can use less and you don't have to coat an area much bigger than your negative. IMHO, rods are harder to use because you have to get the chemistry very evenly distributed along the length of the rod - if you don't, you'll have incomplete coverage and you'll waste an entire batch of chemistry. Not so horrible when you're doing cyanotypes, but big time sucky when you're doing platinum or one of the other more expensive processes.

Also, be aware that a digital negative is really only good for one specific process - the negative you make for a platinum print will not make a good cyanotype or albumen, and vice versa. The upside is that once you have your base file prepared, you can make multiple versions for each process. To get a handle on making the negatives, I'd recommend watching the video on the Bostick & Sullivan website and using some pre-made curves. They may not be perfect for your circumstances, but they'll work and give you more than acceptable results the first time.

Before you buy a single chemical or piece of paper, I'd take some time to look at a lot of prints in person if possible to see the actual finished products in person- looking at reproductions in books is not ideal, and looking at reproductions online is even less ideal - you lose the paper texture and the exact color of the finished print never reproduces 100% accurately.

I know you said you don't want to tone prints (specifically cyanotypes) but that's part of the whole alt process rabbit hole - once you've moved away from a finished photo that is made with mass-produced components, you're completely liberated with what you can do to manipulate the finished product - you can print on highly textured papers, you can do multiple layers of different processes (gum over cyanotype/platinum/whatever, toned cyanotypes, toned kallitypes, toned van dyke browns) and you can experiment with various things to push the color where you want it to go. An entire world of creativity has been opened to you.

looking for the LIKE BUTTON !

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

I had similar aspirations and started with Vandyke Brown, is relatively cheap and easy process. Looks great as is but tones very well with gold theo.
Check out Sandy Kings tutorial https://sandykingphotography.com/resources/technical-writing/vandyke

I will stick with VDB, as it does what I want and I dont see much that attracts me to the more complex and expensive contact printing processes.

You can also selenium tone VDBs if you want to get a more classic b/w cold-tone look, and without the expense of gold toner.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

A world I didn't even know existed! I have always thought "alternative processes" were something kinda 'out there', for people who weren't really looking for true photographs, but rather to distort them and make significantly abstract work. I had no idea that they are actually the predecessors to the processes we know today.

As long as I can have a portrait that is clear, and detailed I'm good. And I don't mean sharpness, I just mean that I want to be able to distinguish the petals of a flower and things like that.

Oh, you can have as detailed or as abstract as you want. With gum, for example, you can even manipulate the print with a paintbrush to bring out, or even remove, details while the print is developing. And you can get fairly accurate color reproduction from gum prints IF you use the right pigments in the right concentrations combined with well made color separation negatives, or you can get totally interpretive with your use of color.

 

[koraks]

Van Dyke Brown is in my experience the easiest alt. process technique to get to work decently and that doesn't give a blue tone. It gives a pronounced S-curve which always makes the images exhibit a lot of mid-tone contrast, but highlights and shadows are sometimes difficult to manage as a result.
I personally prefer the tonal scale of salted paper prints, but coating them properly is a bit more challenging. The curve of salt prints is very long and very straight, allowing for the reproduction of quite subtle and smooth gradations all the way from deep shadows to bright highlights. It does require very contrasty negatives for the best outcome.

 

[Raghu Kuvempunagar]

Not sure if this qualifies as alternative process, but it surely meets the criteria you listed: reversal processing of paper. Essentially, you put a photo paper in your camera instead of film, expose it as it were a slow speed film and then reversal process into a print.


Here's a basic reversal process:
https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/paper-negative-reversal-process.74130/#post-1029646

 

[dwross]

When you can afford a little silver nitrate, in my opinion the best place to start is handmade silver gelatin contact printing paper. All the information to get started is free on The Light Farm website, including a tutorial set and several books to read. Good luck and fun whatever process you choose - .

 

[markbau]

Just my opinion, I started with Salt printing and found it pretty simple and very rewarding. The most expensive part is the gold toner, about $30 tones at least 30-40 8x10s.

 

[jeffreyg]

I can't speak for the other processes but once I saw a real live pt/pd print that was well done I was hooked and wanted to do them as well. I can't say that it is inexpensive beside the chemistry you will need negative material to enlarge to ( a 4x5 can be very effective --Pictorico Ultra Premium OHP or x-ray duplicating film), paper, a good brush or puddle pusher, a printing frame, a shot glass, preferably dedicated trays (5), a tray siphon and uv light source. I started with the sun but quickly bought a uv light box. I get my supplies from Bostick and Sullivan. They are in Santa Fe, NM. They carry all different "alternative"supplies and can answer any questions you may have. I think they also can lead you to a workshop which would probably be the best way to go especially if it is a hands on so the chemistry etc is supplied and the cost would be that of the workshop but you would also be getting information.

http://www.jeffreyglasser.com/
http://sculptureandphotography.com/

 

[KenS]

hi Christopher !!
I would get a copy of Christopher James' book
https://www.amazon.com/Book-Alternative-Photographic-Processes/dp/1285089316
its not too expensive and worth every penny !!

If I may, I will 'second' that advice.. well worth the 'investment'

Ken