5 years…..5 YEARS it has been since I last made a Van Dyke…oef…Glad I kept a blog so that I could look at the notes again 🙂
Recently I joined a photo group called “F68” to broaden my horizon and to get back into my own photography more. It’s a foundation that was established in Limburg, the Netherlands, in 1968 and it’s an autonomous photographers collective. I’m very happy to be a part of this group.
For a potential upcoming exhibition we are working on a theme regarding (mass) consumption. I will elaborate more on this later on but I came up with a concept using images made digitally, printing large format negatives and contact-printing them using Van Dyke.
I once got myself the Epson R2880 to print these negatives but has been left on a shelf for so long now I think it’s more dead than alive. However, at work I have a wonderful Epson Stylus Pro 7890 & 9800 at my disposal and a salesman who mentioned they could get me Omnijet Clear Film on roll (!). I received a 43cm wide roll for testing and so far it’s great!
I turned a file from my Fuji camera into a black and white, inverted it into a negative, adjusted the print settings and printed it on this Omnijet transparent film using the 7890. Yesterday I fixed the chemistry, bought some new paper, Hahnemuhle Bamboo Mixed Media (for the concept I was looking for a durable renewable paper), and had a go at Van Dyke again…oh boy was that fun 🙂
The printer settings I’m about to post I took of this website. For more info look there.
Paper used: Hahnemuhle Fineart Bamboo Mixed Media
Single coated paper 36 x 48 cm
Exposure time: 25 minutes
Wash: 2 minutes
Fix: 5 minutes dilution 3% Sodium Thio-sulphate
Final rinse: 20 minutes
Unfortunately I forgot that the drying darkens the image quite a bit so the end result is too darkish, and I have to do more practice with coating the paper (you see strokes) but wauw, where have I been all these years ?! Anyway, good to be back and more to follow soon 🙂
2013 is already lurking around the corner while 2012 slowly comes to an end. 2012 was a great year but I’m really looking forward to 2013. This will be the year of my own photography. No workshops (by me, I wish to follow at least one myself), not as many days off to fix work for others, just doing my own stuff. I’ve had a lot of people asking me the past two years if they could come to my place or on location to watch me do my collodion ‘tricks’. Some I managed to squeeze into my schedule, others I have recently declined.
I think I made collodion imagery for maybe 2 times this past year that were about my personal work, in studio, not even outside. When I have to invite people over to watch the way I work it’s pretty much keeping me from concentrating on my stuff and making me feel obliged to focus more on the person in question instead of making plates. It took me quite some time but now I realise it’s just not working that way, especially seeing the little amount of time I have for my personal work. It might (have) come across as being arrogant, so be it. Making everyone happy is impossible and it’s certainly not the reason why I got into photography. Of course, asking questions via email, my blog of FB is never a problem but that way I can answer them whenever it suits me 😉
I was also debating which way I’d go with all the processes I’m interested in doing. I want to do so much it’s simply impossible mastering the crafts when working on a million different things. The chat I had yesterday with a friend certainly clarified a couple of things. The most important decision I’ve made is this one:
I want to make 4×5″ collodion negatives, but “standard” ones that I can enlarge with my Omega D2 to print them via the lith process. With standard ones I mean developed in an, albeit adjusted, iron II sulphate developer but no intensification or redeveloping needed with pyro for example. This has a couple of advantages:
- I can print them with the Omega as already mentioned (I love lith for landscapes)
- My collodion workflow on location will be a lot more compact (4×5 camera, smaller tripod etc)
- It will weigh a LOT less. It’ll certainly shave off around 15-20 kilos
- I can scan the negatives with my Epson V700 and turn them into (bigger) digital negatives suitable for whichever contact printing process I wish to dive into
- Uhm, I have to buy a new camera 😉
The last one remains a lot of fun haha! I always wanted to get a small compact lightweight 4×5″ camera and now I have found the perfect excuse to get one! I’m looking for a small field camera such as a Chamonix, Shen Hao or Wista model (let me know if you have one for sale!). The photos I’m about to post are pure camera-**rn so mind your eyes 😉
As you can see this is a terrible decision to make! Anyway, not sure if this will happen this year, the price has to be right for my wallet but I’m looking forward. At least before spring I would like to have this realised so I can take advantage of all there is to the collodion season. Although I’ll be trying some snowy collodion stuff this winter too, but then just with my big one.
As far as printing processes are concerned lith printing will stick by me. I absolutely love this for landscapes. You can take an image to a billion different levels and I love that. I will continue my digital negative journey to work through my collection of 35mm and 120 film. I will either lith them (landscapes) or make them into digital negatives and work on the Van Dyke process more (portraits). I absolutely wish to get that to a higher level which should be coming together in 2013.
I also saw a waxed salt print yesterday in person which looked beyond words. I loved the look and feel of it. Definitely worth looking into but that’s not priority Numero Uno. I have to much of those already 😉 Anyway, lots of plans which hopefully become more reality next year than this past one. Oh, and on top of that working on some conceptual stuff so I can put my skills to good use instead of getting lost into the technique too much.
Have a wonderful couple of weeks this year and may your next year be as challenging as mine seems to me!
I have been trying to make a proper usable curve now but haven’t succeeded yet. This had to do with a couple of things, firstly my inconsistent coating. I found a single coating to give too little density on the paper but a double coat (while letting the paper dry in between) to give unevenness, looking really messy. So, I got back to single coating but more properly. This works as the last two coats looked really good (to me at least).
Secondly I have not yet determined proper exposure time of the paper. This will be my next step before attempting another go at the grayscale chart for the curve. Have to get things right from the start!
Anyway, I had one photo in mind which I made 3 years ago on 120 color film 6×6 (can’t recall the exact one right now, probably Kodak Portra 160VC) and thought it would be great for this process. I scanned the negative, turned it into a black-and-white and printed it without and with a curve which didn’t seem to my liking. The curve caused some solarization to occur so I’ll have to work on that.
The one without a curve is flawed in a way that the light tones in the hand for example appear blown out. This also happens on the forehead. But since I am kind of proud I would like to share it 😉 A modified version with a proper curve will follow a couple of posts down the road and I will compare it side-by-side when it does.
Paper used: Fabriano Artistico LS
Single coated paper 24×30 cm
Exposure time: 8:30 minutes
Making a proper scan of a van dyke print also seems like a challenge. The real print looks nicer.
Anyway, it’s nice to be working out a new workflow with this, naming the files, the negatives and the prints and making it seem coherent so you can actually learn from the three when combining the data.. It is strange however to be sitting behind a laptop in my darkroom, feels a bit awkward and skewed even. Always happy when I can get back to the ‘analogue’ way of working 😉
More to follow soon!
Today I found the time to scan some negatives I want to work with and finally hooked up my printer for the first time. It works! I’ll slowly describe the steps I took to get to the results I’ll be showing. This is a testing phase for me so by no means will the settings I used and show here be perfect. This is meant to keep track of what I’m doing so I can trace back my steps when things go wrong. If you find anything worthy of noting or think certain things best needs changed please leave a comment!
I could of course just scan an image, convert it to black-and-white if it wasn’t already, invert it so that I have a negative and fiddle around with the density as long as I deem necessary. However, this is a highly experimental approach with results not being able to be repeated when needed be. After looking around on the net for awhile I decided to start out with the ChartThrob method as I found on Jalo Porkkala’s website.
First thing is go to their website as linked above and add the jsx file to “presets” -> “scripts” in the Photoshop folder in Applications (Mac). When you (re)start Photoshop you will find this under “file” -> “scripts” -> “chart throb”. Click on the latter to start it up.
The following menu will pop up:
When you choose “Build New Chart Now” the program starts to build a chart for you, filled with profiling information. When you select the option “Numbers” the build-up will take a couple of minutes. This is what the new chart looks like:
You can now invert it so that you’re left with a negative you can print on a transparent sheet. I then proceeded to print the image using an Epson R2880 on Permajet Digital Transfer Film with the following settings:
After the image has been printed you can then contact print the negative using whichever process you wish to calibrate. Right now for me I’m using the Van Dyke process. Expose the sheet with the negative on it so that the mids are exposed for decently. Wash and fix as normal. The final print should look somewhat like this:
After the print has dried scan it while making sure you have a linear scan (gamma 1.0) with a full grayscale range. Crop the scan back to the boundaries of the chart and open ChartThrob again. Choose the option “Analyze ‘InsertYourFilename.jpg’ Now”.
Once it has analyzed the chart you get your curve which you can then save and/or use immediately on a black-and-white image. It should make your image appear grayish and washed out on the screen. This should be correct for printing and you’re ready to go.
However, the curve I’m getting so far doesn’t seem good. I think I’ve overexposed the print with the gray scale on it so I’ll be making a new one. Updates on this will follow asap.
This is the end of part 1. If you’ve made a proper print with the gray scale chart on you should get a proper curve when correctly scanned. Putting this theory into practice is something different I’ve already noticed. As soon as I have a curve that pleases me I’ll report back.
Seeing that the amount of sun doesn’t hold up to the amount of rain we have in the Netherlands I scanned the internet for a facial tanner yesterday morning. Didn’t take too long, apparently a lot of people buy them only to get rid of them some time later on, but the same day I ended up with a nice second hand facial tanner from Eurosolar. The thing that made me go with this one (as there are a LOT of ‘pre-loved’ ones online) is that is has 12 lights instead of the usual 4, making it quite a bit wider than most tanners.
Last night I took it downstairs to see if it would do any good. It sure did! Exposure time now reduced to about 18 minutes instead of the almost 40 minutes of before. I’ll refine this setup later on to also shorten the distance between the lights and the contact print and shorten exposure times even further.
I set it up on two supports, lights facing down and put a small board at the bottom which holds the paper and the negative on top, then covered by a clear glass plate to hold it flat. This is a real basic setup which will undergo a few changes in the future but it does its job. The light from this tanning machine is really annoying for your eyes so I wear sun glasses with UV-protection to cover them a little.
The first image I tried was the one I printed the first time, the 4×5″ collodion negative of the train. This time, and here I learnt a very important lesson, I faced the emulsion layer down so it touched the emulsion layer on the paper (make sure your paper is REALLY dry before you end up ruining your precious negative!). This resulted in a much sharper image as you can see on the scan below.
Paper used: Fabriano Artistico GG
Single coated paper 13×18 cm
Exposure time: 17 minutes
The next I wanted to try was an 8×10″ normal Fomapan negative I made like 2 years ago right before I dived into wet plate collodion photography and never bothered to work with those sheets again. This was a test photo I made back then to get to know the camera so nothing special but as it has a much higher density, a nice gradation and is of bigger size than 4×5″ I felt an irresistible urge to try it 😉
I cut a 24×30 cm sheet of other paper that I also bought and wanted to try, namely Fabriano Artistico GF and coated it a single time, right before using it. The tricky part about my character is that I can be pretty impatience and want to see result. So I used a hair dryer to speed up the drying but decided too soon it was okay to use. I set up the exposure while the paper was actually still a bit moist. This resulted in weird stains and an uneven density in the print. Lesson learned!
Now that I’ve tried it a couple of times it’s time to refine my approach so the next session I will double coat the papers the evening before the printing day and allow it to dry properly.
Paper used: Fabriano Artistico LS
Single coated paper 24×30 cm
Exposure time: 19 minutes
It’s a matter of trial and error but I really enjoy this. I will definitely try and print this negative again as I love the soft delicate feel of this process. It’s almost creamy. My senses are tickled and I really don’t know where to begin; scan negatives with my newly acquired scanner, the Epson V700 (in order to try and), learn how to make proper digital negatives, refine my collodion negative-making which is also in the planning as I received my Pyro-chem for the developer.
And then there’s salt printing I want to try, albumen printing, somewhere in between I’d like to finish my book; Crime and Punishment by Dostoyevski (oh, what a wonderful writer!), hang out with friends, and sleep somewhere too…anyway…I’m not likely to be bored anytime soon 😉
Bon weekend chers amis!
As mentioned in the former post I made my first Van Dyke print today! As I described the formulas used in the former post as well I’ll keep this one short of info, only the necessary stuff.
Paper used: Artistico GG
Single coated paper 13×18 cm
Original: Wet plate collodion negative 4×5″
Exposure time: 36 seconds
Weather: Very cloudy
Fixer: Sodium Thiosulfate 4%
This is how the sheet looks when just exposed to the light with the negative on top:
This is how the sheet looks when it’s been exposed for 28 minutes:
In case you’re wondering about the different backgrounds behind the box that was holding the image…at first I had the box placed on a mat in my darkroom in the door opening. When it stopped raining I placed it on the bricks outside to give it a bit more exposure to light.
And this is the end result after 36 minutes of exposure time, developed, fixed, rinsed and dried:
This paper is way too textured for a proper result using this kind and size of negative. I lost a lot of sharpness and a lot of detail. This paper will be cool for the big digital negatives with landscapes I guess but not for this. Next time I will try the fine-grained one to see how it compares.
I still have a lot to learn but am really excited to have gotten a pretty decent image for my first try and will continue to experiment with this for sure! Double coating will be part of the next test, as well as the hypo clear in step and the toning part. It would be nice to keep this images for a long time! I’ll keep an eye on this print to see how long it’ll last without these two steps.
Today I made my first Van Dyke print! Before posting this image I’ll write down the formulas and methods I used to pull this off.
I used the method described in the book of Richard Farber “Historic Photographic Processes”. The sentences between “…” are exact quotes from that book.
The sensitizer consists of the following:
35 ml Water
10 gr Ferric Ammonium Citrate
Stir well until dissolved.
35 ml Water
1,5 gr Tartaric Acid
Stir well until dissolved
35 ml Water
4 gr Silver Nitrate
Stir well until dissolved
Add solution 2 to solution 1. Stir well. Add solution 3 and stir well.”
This is the solution used to coat the paper with. Keep it in a cool and dark place as it’s sensitive to light. This amount is said to make around 100 4×5″ prints. When kept in a fridge it should keep for about a year.
The paper is being coated under a safelight which you apply on the paper using a brush or a rod. I used one of these:
Make sure you mark your brush well and use it ONLY for this purpose to prevent contamination!
Today I only coated the paper once but it is said that a double coat gives for more rich blacks. Will try that next time. After I coated the paper I left it to dry in my dark darkroom to the air. As I don’t have a contact frame (yet) I used an empty Ilford b+w paper box where I placed the dry coated paper in, placed the negative on top, closed it and brought it out to the light. There I opened the box and the exposure started. The weather was not all on my side as the exposure time went all the way 36 minutes while the literature mentioned times from 5-8 minutes, of course depending on amount of light and density of the negative used.
After the exposure time I put the lid back on the box, took it inside the darkroom and placed the sheet in a tray of gentle running tap water under a safelight. They mention it should be in this tray for about 1-2 minutes or until you see the milkiness go away. I couldn’t see the latter so I just kept it in there for 2 minutes. I then placed the sheet in a tray with a Sodium Thiosulfate fixer of a 4% strength. The recommended time is 5-8 minutes of fixing, I left it in for about 7 minutes before putting it to the final rinsing bath.
Because the fixer gets exhausted pretty fast it’s recommended using a two-bath fixing system.
“Fix the print for 3-4 minutes with regular agitation in each fixing bath. After 5 to 8 prints have been fixed, exchange the second bath for the first, discard the first and add a new second bath. Since most of the work is done by the first bath, the second remains fairly fresh to remove any remaining silver compounds.”
I only used a single fixing bath as I didn’t have that many coated papers to try and seeing that the weather wasn’t going to be my friend that day, I’m glad I saved some of that fixer 😉
The two steps I have left out this first time is the hypo clearing bath and the toning bath. After the fixing bath rinse the print a little and put it in a hypo clearing bath. You can use the Kodak Hypo Clearing bath or make a solution of 1% Sodium Sulfite (cheaper and just as effective). Keep the print in there for 3 minutes with continuous agitation. Then you have to wash the print for half an hour. Leave the print to dry, air-dried or blow dried with gentle heat.
And then there’s the toning part. Unlike other POP-processes the Van Dyke is best toned after fixing to keep it from staining. The toners I want to use in the future are gold toning and selenium, the ones I already use for other processes. Toning leads to a deeper color and improves permanence of the image.
Anyway, I’m having fun and this WILL be continued! 🙂
One of the processes I’ve been meaning to dive into is Van Dyke printing. I would like to make more collodion negatives and find different ways of printing them. This week I finally got around ordering the chemistry and yesterday I bought 3 different papers to begin with. It’s all 200 grams Fabriano Artistic0 but with a different grain / surface. One is very smooth (LS), one is a little rougher (GF) and one is really rough (GG). I don’t know which one will work better. It will all depend on the photo and the result one has in mind. I also want to try albumen printing, ordered that chemistry as well, and since this type of paper seems to be quite versatile I decided to go with that (gum printing is also still on the menu). Luckily I can buy this and other papers at our local artist store so if I want something else I can get it in no time.
I enhanced the contrast of the image to emphasize the structure of the paper.
“The VDB (Van Dyke Brown) process produces an image due to the reaction / reduction of ferric (iron) salt to a ferrous state during exposure to UV light. The Van Dyke process employs a sensitizer formula consisting of ferric ammonium citrate, tartaric acid, and silver nitrate and is wash-developed in distilled and fresh water. The Van Dyke print is then either toned in one of several toning options, for color or archival reasons, or immediately fixed in a 3% sodium thiosulfate bath and washed for permanence. ”
Source: the Book of Alternative Photographic Processes; second edition by Christopher James.
This is a short description of the process. I cited out of a book (a book which is really really handy to have at hand) to be able to give accurate information at this point. I’ll expand the information later on as I start experimenting with this.