Your favorite film/Dev for Salt printing

[ronlamarsh]

I have just done some testing on Arista EDU Ultra 400 in 5X7 and have found it has a very pronounced shoulder that prevents me from getting densities beyond about 1.77 and this is with ansco 47 which in my estimation is about a 1/2 step below D-19. With it(ansco 47) I was able to make bullet proof negatives with the EDU ultra 200 but not the 400. So I am casting about for a different combination. Price is always an issue for me so what about EDU ultra 100 , EFKE PL100?

 

[Keith Tapscott.]

I have only ever made one salt-print so far and that was under the guidance of a photographer who lives locally to me. I used FP4 Plus 8x10 film.

FWIW, a developer such as Kodak HC-110 dilution 'A' developed for about twice as long as the normal recommended dilution 'B' time may provide a suitable starting time.

The negative I used was developed in Rodinal 1+25 for 16 minutes at 20*C and has still provided fairly soft tone gradation despite extended development. I must try salt printing again one day.

 

[David William White]

The trick is to overexpose and overdevelop. Don't be timid about it, either. I overexpose by about 3 stops (from 'normal'), then develop to completion in paper strength developer. You want thick, contrasty negatives. They will be unsuitable for silver-gelatin printing.

I happen to use a very slow duplicating film (Kodak 2430), but I've also used Adox Ortho 25 and even HP5 with decent results, as long as I baked it good and cooked it well-done.

Here's two examples I printed this morning (nothing terribly special, just what I was shooting yesterday). Exposures were at f/5.6 for 10 seconds or so, and development was done in Ilford MG paper developer at working strength for paper. The printing paper is Crane's cover stock, 80lb, and coated with a salt solution and a 10% silver nitrate solution.

 

[Allen Friday]

I have a couple of David William White's salt prints and they are beautiful. They look even better in person than on the net. I would follow his advice.

 

[Keith Tapscott.]

The trick is to overexpose and overdevelop. Don't be timid about it, either. I overexpose by about 3 stops (from 'normal'), then develop to completion in paper strength developer. You want thick, contrasty negatives. They will be unsuitable for silver-gelatin printing.

I happen to use a very slow duplicating film (Kodak 2430), but I've also used Adox Ortho 25 and even HP5 with decent results, as long as I baked it good and cooked it well-done.

Here's two examples I printed this morning (nothing terribly special, just what I was shooting yesterday). Exposures were at f/5.6 for 10 seconds or so, and development was done in Ilford MG paper developer at working strength for paper. The printing paper is Crane's cover stock, 80lb, and coated with a salt solution and a 10% silver nitrate solution.

I think I had the exposure right, but I would definitely try a higher energy developer next time.
I believe that Terry King uses Ilford P.Q-Universal for his negatives.
The next logical step would be to try making an albumen print.

 

[David William White]

I like yours, Keith. Very refined and delicate, as suites the subject. Lots of different looks can be achieved, but in my experience, they all start with deep exposure and thorough development.

P.S. Thanks, Allen, for the positive assessment!

 

[ronlamarsh]

response from Freestyle

I got a response from freestyle as I posed my issue to them also. I was told that the base (I assume emulsion is what they are really talking about) is rather thin which I take to mean "less silver". And their adivsor tested it exposed at E.i. 50 or so to get the density up. My whole issue is that I cannot get the contrast range; If I expose it at ei50 sure I'll get a greater maximum density but that pulls up my low values at the same time does it not? For me the issue is there is a pronounced shoulder to the film so that beyond a certain point density does not increase and this would jibe, to my mind, with the "thin emulsion theory"......less silver less to develope etc. From a recent test I exposed at ei 200 and developed in ansco 47 stock for 10 min. Maximum density tops out at about 1.8 but is basically flat for the last 4 to 5 steps of the wedge. I am open to any information i can get but I cannot see where exposing film longer increases the contrast? higher energy developer yes but if the film hasn't got the mojo to begin with will any of these things work?

 

[David William White]

Possibly. I've not used Edu Ultra 400 for salt. You'd just have to try it at 50 and see how it prints.

Also, have you tried adding potassium dichromate? When I'm coating, I usually do 3 or 4 sheets of paper without any, and then 1 or 2 sheets with 2 drops/print of 2% solution. If a well-exposed print is lacking on straight paper, then I'll do another print on the spiked paper.

I'm sure you're aware, but just to round things out, contrast in the print is also dependent upon the ratio of salt to silver, the quality of illumination while making the print, and I suppose, the paper. By far, though, the biggest factor is the density and contrast of the negative.

Can you post an example of what you've managed so far with the EDU Ultra?

 

[ronlamarsh]

Will try to get some posted. Have tried the pot dichromate to no avail. I have experimented with the quality of light and my most recent effort was on a cloudy day with pot dichromate added and the image is nearly contrastless! I use a 12% silver solution and double coat. Just a note cyanotypes with the same negative come out great being just a tinge on the contrasty side and to boot the negatives are printable in regular silver. I used a step wedge to test the film and the last 4 to 5 steps showed a nearly flat response. I have resold the film and am casting about for something more suited to me needs. The discontinued fomapan 200 was fantastic am hoping fomapan 100 or maybe the efke 100 have promise.

 

[Keith Tapscott.]

Film Exposure.

I like yours, Keith. Very refined and delicate, as suites the subject. Lots of different looks can be achieved, but in my experience, they all start with deep exposure and thorough development.

P.S. Thanks, Allen, for the positive assessment!

Thanks David. For the image I posted, I mentioned that I was under guidance from someone who teaches salt-printing at her home.
She simply set her spotmeter to the recommended ISO rating and placed the black ball of wool in the basket onto zone 3. Additional exposure was then given for the bellows extension factor. The recommended development time for Rodinal diluted 1+25 was 8 minutes, so that time was doubled.

 

[Ole]

One possibility is to bleach and redevelop the negative in a staining developer. Use something with a really heavy stain, like Pextral's.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

Second on the staining developer. Start with a good old-fashioned staining developer like PMK Pyro or ABC Pyro from the beginning, and over-develop the hell out of it.

 

[David William White]

Might want to dupe the negative before bleach/redevelop, just in case that doesn't go so well. Heck, you'd get a printable negative from the dupe if you slide the density up the curve on the interpositive. I've rescued a couple of negatives that way.

Ron, I want to go back to when you said you double coat. My gut says that would reduce contrast, but not sure. Have you by chance exposed single and double coatings from the same negative?

 

[David William White]

...nearly contrastless! I use a 12% silver solution and double coat...

Hi, Ron. I've done two prints this morning from a negative that was a bit thinner than I normally like, doing one at 12% silver and one at 6% silver to test my hypothesis. These were both done on the same paper and within 15 minutes of each other under clear sky, the only difference was dilution of both the salt and the silver from B&S's stock solutions.

It's a little more pronounced in person, but I'd say that by thinning the salt to half, I was able to get almost a full grade of contrast improvement. So if you can't get the contrast in the film, then maybe you could try thin-coating rather than double-coating. It will be more economical as well...

Please keep us in the loop as your trails progress...

 

[Philippe Grunchec]

How about using Tetenal Dokumol? Supposed to give very contrasty negatives.