Thanks @alecrmyers. I have ordered some laminating pouches, precision metal rod and also the granite surface in the hope to get something close to you. I will let you know how it goes.
Diffusion Transfer Printing ("Polaroid" peel-apart) recipes
-
A
- Thread starter alecrmyers
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
For Sale Canon EF 16-35 F4 IS USM
- Started by jordanka16
-
For Sale James "Theory of the Photographic Process", 4th Edition $75
- Started by laser
-
For Sale Contax Carl Zeiss Jena Sonnar/Tessar Lenses
- Started by wjlapier
-
For Sale Darkroom supplies, accessories. Local (Tacoma, WA) pickup only
- Started by binglebugbob
-
Found Looking for a Wollensak 6" (159mm) f12.5 Extreme W.A.
- Started by lecarp
Forum statistics
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2009
- Messages
- 87
- Format
- Large Format
Here is a quick progress report. I have (finally) achieved imaging on a receiver paper prepared with silica instead of gelatin. Lots more to explore here including use of different nucleation particles, and how to improve Dmax and adjust the tonality. I'm still working on different developer formulations. But I was very very happy to get this image this morning, that shows good gradations:
Attachments
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2009
- Messages
- 87
- Format
- Large Format
I think it might be helpful to give an overview of what needs to be in place to make this process work - so here's a summary of necessary things:
A substrate for the receiver paper. Paper of some kind perhaps, or plastic film.
A liquid matrix to carry the nucleation particles. This is coated onto the substrate where it dries, or hardens. Examples are gelatin, or silica. There are other options.
Nucleation particles, mixed in the matrix (or possibly deposited on its surface). A wide variety of substances will work. I have used zinc sulphide, metallic palladium, and metallic silver, all in nanoparticle form. The literature has details of many many others. There will be a variety of chemical or physical ways to create them.
A light sensitive layer: for this I have been using the Ilford Multigrade photo paper; I'm sure other films will work.
A developing paste or gel, which needs to include at least the following elements:
A thickener or viscosity control agent, such as carboxymethyl cellulose, to allow the developer to spread properly between the receiver and photosensitive layer.
A developer chemical: one or more of the usual suspects such as hydroquinone, metol, p-aminophenol, phenidone, ascorbic acid, or many many other candidates.
A silver solvent, to disolve the silver halide in the light sensitive layer and allow it to diffuse to the receiver paper. This process acts at the same time as and in competition with the silver development. The silver that is developed remains in the light sensitive layer; the silver that isn't developed dissolves and diffuses to the nucleation particles where it precipitates in metalic form. Thiosulphate is the obvious candidate, but there are others.
If the developer needs alkaline conditions to work (most do) then you need pH control, perhaps sodium hydroxide, or another basic substance.
Some developers may need an anti-oxidant - typically sodium sulphite - in the mix, too.
Toning and/or restraining agents may be required to adjust the colour tone and density of the deposited silver, if necessary.
Other elements which may be helpful or desirable include:
A stripping layer so the used developer paste peels cleanly off the receiver paper without leaving stripes or stains after the photosensitive layer is separated.
Optionally a wash, wipe or rinse process to remove or neutralize any developer paste left on the image.
There are some possible variations in where things can be located: for instance, any toning or restraining agents can be included in the receiver paper matrix layer instead of (or as well as) in the developer. So also could the developing agent(s) themselves.
From a physical point of view, you will need a way to portion a metered aliquot of the developer paste and some kind of "rails" to enable it to spread out to a uniform thickness across the receiver. I have been using a plastic syringe to does the developer and 3 mil polyester film as rails. Also, you will need some method to cause the developer to spread, like Land's camera's rollers or similar. As I mentioned above, the flatness or straightness of this mechanism is very important since an even thickness of very thin developer is required to get decent image quality.
From what I have determined, it's somewhat a case of choose one (or more) options from column A (developers), one option from column B (nucleation particles), one option from column C (matrix), one option from column D (silver solvents) - etc. That is, to a great extent all the developers will work with any of the nucleation particles, all of which will work with any matrix, which can be spread on any support material, etc. The choices of which to use then come down to secondary factors like availability, convenience, cost, and image quality.
I hope that helps people interested in trying this process.
A substrate for the receiver paper. Paper of some kind perhaps, or plastic film.
A liquid matrix to carry the nucleation particles. This is coated onto the substrate where it dries, or hardens. Examples are gelatin, or silica. There are other options.
Nucleation particles, mixed in the matrix (or possibly deposited on its surface). A wide variety of substances will work. I have used zinc sulphide, metallic palladium, and metallic silver, all in nanoparticle form. The literature has details of many many others. There will be a variety of chemical or physical ways to create them.
A light sensitive layer: for this I have been using the Ilford Multigrade photo paper; I'm sure other films will work.
A developing paste or gel, which needs to include at least the following elements:
A thickener or viscosity control agent, such as carboxymethyl cellulose, to allow the developer to spread properly between the receiver and photosensitive layer.
A developer chemical: one or more of the usual suspects such as hydroquinone, metol, p-aminophenol, phenidone, ascorbic acid, or many many other candidates.
A silver solvent, to disolve the silver halide in the light sensitive layer and allow it to diffuse to the receiver paper. This process acts at the same time as and in competition with the silver development. The silver that is developed remains in the light sensitive layer; the silver that isn't developed dissolves and diffuses to the nucleation particles where it precipitates in metalic form. Thiosulphate is the obvious candidate, but there are others.
If the developer needs alkaline conditions to work (most do) then you need pH control, perhaps sodium hydroxide, or another basic substance.
Some developers may need an anti-oxidant - typically sodium sulphite - in the mix, too.
Toning and/or restraining agents may be required to adjust the colour tone and density of the deposited silver, if necessary.
Other elements which may be helpful or desirable include:
A stripping layer so the used developer paste peels cleanly off the receiver paper without leaving stripes or stains after the photosensitive layer is separated.
Optionally a wash, wipe or rinse process to remove or neutralize any developer paste left on the image.
There are some possible variations in where things can be located: for instance, any toning or restraining agents can be included in the receiver paper matrix layer instead of (or as well as) in the developer. So also could the developing agent(s) themselves.
From a physical point of view, you will need a way to portion a metered aliquot of the developer paste and some kind of "rails" to enable it to spread out to a uniform thickness across the receiver. I have been using a plastic syringe to does the developer and 3 mil polyester film as rails. Also, you will need some method to cause the developer to spread, like Land's camera's rollers or similar. As I mentioned above, the flatness or straightness of this mechanism is very important since an even thickness of very thin developer is required to get decent image quality.
From what I have determined, it's somewhat a case of choose one (or more) options from column A (developers), one option from column B (nucleation particles), one option from column C (matrix), one option from column D (silver solvents) - etc. That is, to a great extent all the developers will work with any of the nucleation particles, all of which will work with any matrix, which can be spread on any support material, etc. The choices of which to use then come down to secondary factors like availability, convenience, cost, and image quality.
I hope that helps people interested in trying this process.
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2009
- Messages
- 87
- Format
- Large Format
This summer I spent quite a lot of time and effort synthesizing a developer that Polaroid patented in 1963 (US357207A) - 2,3,5-trimethyl-p-aminophenol, following the procedure described in very brief detail in that patent. It does give very good results in this process, and appears to improve the speed (ASA rating) of the photosensitive material by a stop or two compared to more traditional developers.
Equipment needed includes two 500ml Erlenmeyer flasks, a heated stir-plate (with thermostatic temperature control is ideal), a vacuum filtration funnel with vacuum source, and a vacuum drying chamber. I also found it helpful to have a source of argon to keep the oxygen out while the product dries, becuse it's very sensitive to atmospheric oxygen while damp.
The following procedure produes about 8-10 grams of developer (235TMPAP for short):
Begin with dissolving 13.95g sulphanilic acid and 5.31g sodium hydroxide in 144ml of water in a 500ml flask. Cool the flask in an ice bath with stirring, and while cooling add 5.04g sodium nitrite.
Prepare 28.5g muriatic acid (30% hydrochloric acid, sold as concrete cleaner) with 22.5ml water, and cool this in a freezer for 20-30 minutes.
Add the acid dropwise to the previous flask while stirring and maintaning it in the ice bath. The temperature needs to be maintained below 10°C - preferrably below 5°C t- o avoid evolution of toxic nitrogen oxide gas (if you see brown gas coming off, that's bad.) Adding the hydrochloric to the flask is very exothermic so the addition has to be done very slowly, drop by drop. It should take perhaps 30 minutes to add the full amount, and the temperature should be monitored throughout.
As the hydrochloric acid is added, the sulfanilic/nitrite mixture turns deeper and deeper red as a diazotization reaction proceeds. About two thirds of the way through a yellow/orange precipitate should form suddenly, resulting on completion with what is described in the literature as a "slurry". From there, the precipitate gets thicker as the rest of the hydrochloric acid is added.
Meanwhile In a second flask ("flask 2') prepare 9.9g of 2,3,5-trimethylphenol, 11.7g of sodium hydroxide and 36ml of water. On adding the water the mixture heats rapidly as the TMP and sodium hydroxide dissolve, then it precipitates to a slurry on cooling.
When the diazo slurry in flask 1 is finished, add it to flask 2. This can be done all at once. The result is an instant deep blood red solution/slurry.
Now warm flask 2 to 50°C with stirring then add 60g of sodium hydrosulphite over the course of a minute. Stir with heating for 1-2 hours. The red color turns to a dark tan, then dark orange, then light orange, then finally yellow, with a pink/yellow precipitate of 235TMPAP. It will be necessary to manually swirl the flask at intervals to wash the crusty products off the inside walls. When the flask contents are pale yellow throughout, the reaction is complete. Allow the flask to cool to room temperature.
Vacuum filter the contents of flask 2, carefully washing the solid residue with cold water in which a small amount of sodium hydrosulphite is dissolved (1g in 500ml). This is necessary to stop the solid precipitate turning brown. It may be necessary to do this two or three times. I also found it necessary to do the filtration under an argon stream. Leave the vacuum running for 2-4 hours. Then transfer the yellow solid quickly to a vacuum drying chamber (I used calcium chloride as a drying agent) for 12-24 hours, or until a completely dry powder. Once it is dry, the browning problem is minimized.
The 235TMPAP produced this way is not particularly pure - the pure product should be colourless with a sharp melting point but the raw reaction product is pale salmon colour when dry and he melting point range is quite wide. Small samples of pure crystalline product can be produced by sublimation under vacuum, but not enough to use in developing. Nevertheless the raw product works adequately well. I found a regular recrystallization to be very difficult because of the tendency of the product to oxidize when drying. Unfortunately I don't have something like a nitrogen glove box that would help here. If there are any experienced organic chemists who can provide any advice a better workup with limited facilities please get in touch.
I will try to prepare some photographs of the process, and also a youtube video when I have the chance.
Shortly I will post a recipe for a receiver paper using silica, as promised, and a developer recipe using the 235TMPAP along with some sample transfer images.
Equipment needed includes two 500ml Erlenmeyer flasks, a heated stir-plate (with thermostatic temperature control is ideal), a vacuum filtration funnel with vacuum source, and a vacuum drying chamber. I also found it helpful to have a source of argon to keep the oxygen out while the product dries, becuse it's very sensitive to atmospheric oxygen while damp.
The following procedure produes about 8-10 grams of developer (235TMPAP for short):
Begin with dissolving 13.95g sulphanilic acid and 5.31g sodium hydroxide in 144ml of water in a 500ml flask. Cool the flask in an ice bath with stirring, and while cooling add 5.04g sodium nitrite.
Prepare 28.5g muriatic acid (30% hydrochloric acid, sold as concrete cleaner) with 22.5ml water, and cool this in a freezer for 20-30 minutes.
Add the acid dropwise to the previous flask while stirring and maintaning it in the ice bath. The temperature needs to be maintained below 10°C - preferrably below 5°C t- o avoid evolution of toxic nitrogen oxide gas (if you see brown gas coming off, that's bad.) Adding the hydrochloric to the flask is very exothermic so the addition has to be done very slowly, drop by drop. It should take perhaps 30 minutes to add the full amount, and the temperature should be monitored throughout.
As the hydrochloric acid is added, the sulfanilic/nitrite mixture turns deeper and deeper red as a diazotization reaction proceeds. About two thirds of the way through a yellow/orange precipitate should form suddenly, resulting on completion with what is described in the literature as a "slurry". From there, the precipitate gets thicker as the rest of the hydrochloric acid is added.
Meanwhile In a second flask ("flask 2') prepare 9.9g of 2,3,5-trimethylphenol, 11.7g of sodium hydroxide and 36ml of water. On adding the water the mixture heats rapidly as the TMP and sodium hydroxide dissolve, then it precipitates to a slurry on cooling.
When the diazo slurry in flask 1 is finished, add it to flask 2. This can be done all at once. The result is an instant deep blood red solution/slurry.
Now warm flask 2 to 50°C with stirring then add 60g of sodium hydrosulphite over the course of a minute. Stir with heating for 1-2 hours. The red color turns to a dark tan, then dark orange, then light orange, then finally yellow, with a pink/yellow precipitate of 235TMPAP. It will be necessary to manually swirl the flask at intervals to wash the crusty products off the inside walls. When the flask contents are pale yellow throughout, the reaction is complete. Allow the flask to cool to room temperature.
Vacuum filter the contents of flask 2, carefully washing the solid residue with cold water in which a small amount of sodium hydrosulphite is dissolved (1g in 500ml). This is necessary to stop the solid precipitate turning brown. It may be necessary to do this two or three times. I also found it necessary to do the filtration under an argon stream. Leave the vacuum running for 2-4 hours. Then transfer the yellow solid quickly to a vacuum drying chamber (I used calcium chloride as a drying agent) for 12-24 hours, or until a completely dry powder. Once it is dry, the browning problem is minimized.
The 235TMPAP produced this way is not particularly pure - the pure product should be colourless with a sharp melting point but the raw reaction product is pale salmon colour when dry and he melting point range is quite wide. Small samples of pure crystalline product can be produced by sublimation under vacuum, but not enough to use in developing. Nevertheless the raw product works adequately well. I found a regular recrystallization to be very difficult because of the tendency of the product to oxidize when drying. Unfortunately I don't have something like a nitrogen glove box that would help here. If there are any experienced organic chemists who can provide any advice a better workup with limited facilities please get in touch.
I will try to prepare some photographs of the process, and also a youtube video when I have the chance.
Shortly I will post a recipe for a receiver paper using silica, as promised, and a developer recipe using the 235TMPAP along with some sample transfer images.
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2009
- Messages
- 87
- Format
- Large Format
This is a recipe for the palladium/silica receiver paper, and a video of me creating it.
Ingredients:
30g 10g Rockwool Rigidizer silica suspension (Amazon)
0.5g 0.1% palladium chloride solution (photographic supplier)
15mg sodium borohydride (chemical supply company)
1 drop polysorbate 20 10% (chemical supply company)
Add the palladium chloride to the silica suspension under stirring. Disssolve the sodium borohydride in 1-2ml of water and add dropwise. The solution darkens as the palladium chloride is reduced to the metal, in nanoparticle form. Add 1 drop of PS20 10% to faciliate spreading.
Use a 10 micron coating bar to spread the solution over plastic paper. Using a granite surface plate is very helpful to get an even coat. Allow to dry - then cut to size.
Video is here:
I will post a video of making up some developer, and some images, later.
{Moderator note: edited at poster's request}
Ingredients:
0.5g 0.1% palladium chloride solution (photographic supplier)
15mg sodium borohydride (chemical supply company)
1 drop polysorbate 20 10% (chemical supply company)
Add the palladium chloride to the silica suspension under stirring. Disssolve the sodium borohydride in 1-2ml of water and add dropwise. The solution darkens as the palladium chloride is reduced to the metal, in nanoparticle form. Add 1 drop of PS20 10% to faciliate spreading.
Use a 10 micron coating bar to spread the solution over plastic paper. Using a granite surface plate is very helpful to get an even coat. Allow to dry - then cut to size.
Video is here:
I will post a video of making up some developer, and some images, later.
{Moderator note: edited at poster's request}
Last edited by a moderator:
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2009
- Messages
- 87
- Format
- Large Format
This video demonstrates mixing a developer using 2,3,5-trimethyl-p-aminophenol (235TMPAP), and the creation of images using the receiver paper that was made in the video in the previous post:
The developer is made with 30g of a base alkali/preservative that I made in bulk, to speed up the testing of developers and toners. The base is as follows;
1 litre of water
20g of carboxymethylcellulose as a thckener
20g sodium sulphite - preservative
20g sodium hydroxide - pH control
8.3g sodium thiosulphate - silver solvent
To 30g of this, I add 0.5g of 235TMPAP and mix well. No toner is necessary with this developer, it produces dense blacks and neutral midtones without. The next video I plan will show the synthesis of 235TMPAP from a (slightly) more available precursor, 2,3,5-trimethylphenol.
The developer is made with 30g of a base alkali/preservative that I made in bulk, to speed up the testing of developers and toners. The base is as follows;
1 litre of water
20g of carboxymethylcellulose as a thckener
20g sodium sulphite - preservative
20g sodium hydroxide - pH control
8.3g sodium thiosulphate - silver solvent
To 30g of this, I add 0.5g of 235TMPAP and mix well. No toner is necessary with this developer, it produces dense blacks and neutral midtones without. The next video I plan will show the synthesis of 235TMPAP from a (slightly) more available precursor, 2,3,5-trimethylphenol.
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2009
- Messages
- 87
- Format
- Large Format
As promised, here is a video of the synthesis of 2,3,5-trimethyl-p-aminophenol as described a few posts ago:
Caution: obey all sensible precautions and product warnings.
Caution: obey all sensible precautions and product warnings.
Last edited:
This is incredible stuff @alecrmyers. I need to update you on my progress also although they are drawing on some of your older methods. I am excited to try the new method.
A couple of quick questions if I may?
1. I see you are using a finer roller for the new approach, believe its a 10 micron one. That work better than the 25 or 100 you have used in the past?
2. Did you find a place to purchase 2,3,5-trimethyl-p-aminophenol as obviously the equipment you have is getting into a bit more specialized.
Wonderful work again, really exciting to see this.
A couple of quick questions if I may?
1. I see you are using a finer roller for the new approach, believe its a 10 micron one. That work better than the 25 or 100 you have used in the past?
2. Did you find a place to purchase 2,3,5-trimethyl-p-aminophenol as obviously the equipment you have is getting into a bit more specialized.
Wonderful work again, really exciting to see this.
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2009
- Messages
- 87
- Format
- Large Format
The 10 micron coating bar (it doesn't rotate, so isn't really a roller) leaves a coating that is much faster to dry, and without a lot of extra liquid has less pooling and run-off. I'm getting to the stage of starting to care more about image quality so I've been putting more effort into getting an even coating now. I've also ordered a 4 micron bar to see if that's effective.
You'll also see that I did the coating on my granite surface plate. A wavy surface under the coating bar is a bad as a wavy coating bar. A feature of the gelatin matrix was that image density reduced with a thin gelatin layer. The silica matrix seems to work better with a thin layer (which means faster drying and less material used.) Land did a lot of research into where exactly the silver layer was deposited: on his silica papers electron micrographs show the silver deposition was confined to a thin layer at the surface. There are some cryptic footnote references to other people's research on image deposition inside gelatin layers.
I also notice that the silica paper is sensitive to fingerprint grease: when I don't wear gloves and I'm not careful I get my own fingerprints turning up in white on images. Image longevity may also be an issue. I feel that mankind lucked out when it found that a suspension of silver halides was easy to make in gelatin, because a side effect is that after development the gelatin protects the metallic silver from oxidation and particularly from atmospheric sulphur. With a silver image on silica I don't know if there will be staining or fading. Land's early solution was the print coater provided with each film. Will that be necessary here? I'm not sure.
Where to get 235TMPAP: You can buy any chemical you like from the right people in China: 2,3,5-trimethylphenol is a stocked item; nobody stocks 2,3,5-trimethyl-p-aminophenol, but they'll make it for you to order for $$$. Otherwise maybe keep on with the phenidone/hydroquinone/metol combinations?
Further work: I have been doing some tests on making a developer that uses an organic base as a developer, and uracil as a silver solvent, like are in this post that lists the following ingredients for some Polaroid film developers:
Potassium Hydroxide 7-13%
Uracil 3-7%
Triethanolamine 0.1-1%
DMEHA; DI (Methoxyethyl) Hydroxylamine 1-5%
I have been fiddling around with this kind of idea with medocre results so far. This type of developer has the advantage that it's colourless even when it oxidizes, so no brown stains where it doesn't peel clean or isn't washed. However look at the hydroxide content - the pH is crazy crazy high and that stuff stings badly if you get it on your skin.
You'll also see that I did the coating on my granite surface plate. A wavy surface under the coating bar is a bad as a wavy coating bar. A feature of the gelatin matrix was that image density reduced with a thin gelatin layer. The silica matrix seems to work better with a thin layer (which means faster drying and less material used.) Land did a lot of research into where exactly the silver layer was deposited: on his silica papers electron micrographs show the silver deposition was confined to a thin layer at the surface. There are some cryptic footnote references to other people's research on image deposition inside gelatin layers.
I also notice that the silica paper is sensitive to fingerprint grease: when I don't wear gloves and I'm not careful I get my own fingerprints turning up in white on images. Image longevity may also be an issue. I feel that mankind lucked out when it found that a suspension of silver halides was easy to make in gelatin, because a side effect is that after development the gelatin protects the metallic silver from oxidation and particularly from atmospheric sulphur. With a silver image on silica I don't know if there will be staining or fading. Land's early solution was the print coater provided with each film. Will that be necessary here? I'm not sure.
Where to get 235TMPAP: You can buy any chemical you like from the right people in China: 2,3,5-trimethylphenol is a stocked item; nobody stocks 2,3,5-trimethyl-p-aminophenol, but they'll make it for you to order for $$$. Otherwise maybe keep on with the phenidone/hydroquinone/metol combinations?
Further work: I have been doing some tests on making a developer that uses an organic base as a developer, and uracil as a silver solvent, like are in this post that lists the following ingredients for some Polaroid film developers:
Potassium Hydroxide 7-13%
Uracil 3-7%
Triethanolamine 0.1-1%
DMEHA; DI (Methoxyethyl) Hydroxylamine 1-5%
I have been fiddling around with this kind of idea with medocre results so far. This type of developer has the advantage that it's colourless even when it oxidizes, so no brown stains where it doesn't peel clean or isn't washed. However look at the hydroxide content - the pH is crazy crazy high and that stuff stings badly if you get it on your skin.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2009
- Messages
- 87
- Format
- Large Format
This developer is a hybrid, using both (liquid) amines and a powder developer (phenidone):
Developer 140
30g CMC 2.5%
2.7g sodium hydroxide
1.0g uracil
1.1g N,N-diethylhydroxylamine (DEHA)
0.6g aminoethylethanolamine (AEEA)
0.5g phenidone
It gives really excellent results with the silica/palladium paper in my November 16 post. In fairness the jpeg of the print below doesn't do justice to the quality of the print. The silica has a very attractive natural gloss finish, the print sharpness is excellent (you can see it in the weave of the pattern on the doll's collar) and the image tone is a slightly warm black (this is where the scan falls down the most I think).
For reference, the negative material is again Ilford Multigrade, 3mil developer thickness and a contact time of 60 seconds.
Developer 140
30g CMC 2.5%
2.7g sodium hydroxide
1.0g uracil
1.1g N,N-diethylhydroxylamine (DEHA)
0.6g aminoethylethanolamine (AEEA)
0.5g phenidone
It gives really excellent results with the silica/palladium paper in my November 16 post. In fairness the jpeg of the print below doesn't do justice to the quality of the print. The silica has a very attractive natural gloss finish, the print sharpness is excellent (you can see it in the weave of the pattern on the doll's collar) and the image tone is a slightly warm black (this is where the scan falls down the most I think).
For reference, the negative material is again Ilford Multigrade, 3mil developer thickness and a contact time of 60 seconds.
Attachments
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2009
- Messages
- 87
- Format
- Large Format
I don't think so. I did a test - here are three test plates with developer 140, stripped at 30 seconds, 60 seconds and 120 seconds. There's not much difference in contrast. A little difference in density - the 30 second plate is (a little bit) lighter in the blacks, that's all.
Attachments
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2009
- Messages
- 87
- Format
- Large Format
Maybe, but I don't really know what a "practical application" looks like. I think where I want to go with this is to get it smooth in 8x10 format. There's something about instant 8x10 prints that appeals.
I have ordered some x-ray film as it's a) cheaper than the Ilford paper and b) a few stops faster. At the moment the most impractical element for me is exposure times of several seconds because the printing paper emulsion has an EI of about 6.
I have ordered some x-ray film as it's a) cheaper than the Ilford paper and b) a few stops faster. At the moment the most impractical element for me is exposure times of several seconds because the printing paper emulsion has an EI of about 6.
You bet. With practical application I'm thinking more along the lines of a user-repeatable alternative printing process such as we know for other processes; not so much a Polaroid-like marketable product.
The x-ray film may be tricky to work with due to a much less resilient supercoat. I expect this will affect your process.
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2009
- Messages
- 87
- Format
- Large Format
I was told earlier this year with 100% confidence by people involved in the New55 project that nobody would be interested in what you're suggesting ;-)
What do you see about this process that isn't user-repeatable? You can set this up for a few hundred dollars. The materials are pennies per print. All it needs is some people to start trying it.
What do you see about this process that isn't user-repeatable? You can set this up for a few hundred dollars. The materials are pennies per print. All it needs is some people to start trying it.
I've learned that the world is a big place and that no matter how seemingly eccentric, silly or inane the idea, somebody on this rock is bound to be interested in it!
Oh, I think it is, but in my experience a process like this goes through a couple of stages:
1: Demonstration of the basic principle
2: Identifying all relevant process parameters
3: Figuring out which parameters are critical and in what sense
4: Documenting and communicating the process.
You're presently in phase 2; my question is one of the many questions that points ahead to phase 3.
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2009
- Messages
- 87
- Format
- Large Format
I am never going to make more than a tiny dent in phases 2 and 3. That's going to be done by people richer, cleverer and with more resources than me. Edwin Land had a multibillion dollar international corporation working on item 2 for decades, and made "some" progress. From my perspective phase 4 is nearly complete, with this thread, and the videos that I've posted.
One of the things I tried to explain above is that there are a million different ways to configure this process. Once you have a couple of basic elements in place it's almost impossible to stop an image forming, and there are an unlimited number of ways to influence it. It's not going to be me who comes up with "the" answer and tells everyone what it is.
At some point (I hope) I'll get a process that works well enough *for me*, buy myself a cheap 8x10 camera, take the pictures I want to take, make the prints I want to make and put them on the wall, and then move on to something else. "Look", I shall tell visitors, "I reinvented Polaroids!" I shall say. And they'll yawn and wonder why I bothered. Other than that, I'm looking forward to having someone else tell me what I'm doing wrong and what the critical elements are.
Do you want me to send you some paper and developer, so you can try it?
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2009
- Messages
- 87
- Format
- Large Format
I made a new batch of paper and developer and tried again, to check repeatability. I'd say it's pretty good.
I'm happy to send free of charge some paper and developer to the first three people who want to try this and send me their mailing address. You'll need to provide:
- a darkroom in which to work
- your own roller and plate
- Ilford Multigrade paper or film of your own choosing in 5x4 format, and a camera in which to expose it
Who wants to give it a go?
I'm happy to send free of charge some paper and developer to the first three people who want to try this and send me their mailing address. You'll need to provide:
- a darkroom in which to work
- your own roller and plate
- Ilford Multigrade paper or film of your own choosing in 5x4 format, and a camera in which to expose it
Who wants to give it a go?
Attachments
MattKing
Moderator
Post #56 edited at poster's request.
I love what you are doing, very impressed and the idea of making this for an 8x10 process makes sense. I enjoy experimenting with alternative materials and would hope to be able to do this in the future. I was wondering if you were going to try with film so pleased about the x-ray though it would have be single sided and options are getting limited.
Just out of interest I have loads of Polaroid 4x5 receiver sheets from failed film. Would they be useful to try use without coating, though not practical for ongoing use? (I never throw anything away especially from a product so carefully engineered and even retained the envelopes).
Just out of interest I have loads of Polaroid 4x5 receiver sheets from failed film. Would they be useful to try use without coating, though not practical for ongoing use? (I never throw anything away especially from a product so carefully engineered and even retained the envelopes).
I'm sorry for not responding to this earlier. I think I should politely decline - not out of lack of interest, but in the awareness that I'm trying to cram much more photography/printmaking in my days than there are hours to get the job done. I'd love to give this process a try, sometime, but I think this time may be quite far ahead in the future. It doesn't feel fair to you and others to receive these materials you kindly offer just for me to have them sit around idle for the moment I ever manage to get round to it.
As to the process and its 'ripeness': for one thing, I wouldn't downplay the progress you've made and the value/extent of the groundwork you've documented in this thread alone. Secondly, indeed, I think there are many ways to do this process, and I think one of the logical steps ahead would be for one or two 'archetypical' workflows to materialize from the present state of more explorative experimentation. Your offer to supply another practitioner with materials could be very, very useful in this regard - so thank you for considering that opportunity!
I keep following this with interest.
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2009
- Messages
- 87
- Format
- Large Format
Sheet film is too expensive for me: if anyone from Harman or Foma is reading this and they want to send me couple of dozen boxes each of 4x5 and 8x10 materials, I'm up for it. Happy to give them credit if they do. But there's no way I can finance that myself. X-ray film is cheap though - I don't see why the presence of an extra redundant layer of emulsion would cause any problems.
Regarding your Polaroid sheets: not very useful from an improving the process point of view because it would be a dead end to put in effort to reuse material that isn't manufactured any more. But you might find it interesting to mix up some developer and experiment with the process using it, no?
| Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:  |