Showcase for Your HCWP's

[CreationBear]

Indeed. I would avoid heating those prints. The oily solvent may still stain. They do dry out virtually completely at some point.

Excellent, IIRC “brown” inks like Gamblin 1907 take upwards of a month to dry—probably not worth the risk.

KYsailor, thanks for elaborating on your process—even if it’s just making a virtue out of necessity, I’ve about decided I don’t need much more than a “whole plate” size image area…I’d prefer a work that can be picked up off of a desktop easel rather than “wall art.”

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

not sure if this belongs here - I have been doing some photogravure intaglio prints from my digital images. Using the direct to plate process with a fairy linear curve in QTR. Printed on hahnemuhle durer copperplate with black ink.... was messing around with doing some gum layers over the intaglio prints. Was using some prints that were not "perfect" but had some small flaws/uneven inking etc. Decided rather than using gum layers I would to try just hand paint in some watercolor over the print. Now I have absolutely NO skill in watercolor or painting, but decided to give it a try - I was surprised how it came out - not perfect but not too bad either. Wondering if others have gone down this path - sort of like old silver gelatin B&W prints that were hand colored.......


City Gate in Gerace, Italy - Calabria

View attachment 387145

Well done! I did this back in 80's, in my art school days. This was before I dabbled with photography, though. Everything was hand drawn. I worked with very thin washes, building up layers as I went.

 

[AndrewBurns]

I've been attempting to use the Jacquard Solarfast UV-sensitive dyes to make CMYK prints. This stuff really does seem more designed for fabrics rather than paper as it's truely a pain to work with and the results seem extremely variable on paper. The worst aspect so far is that the colour density seems very low (but also extremely variable!), the yellow stains like crazy and the 'black' I can't get to print as anything other than a light chocolate brown...

This is my first CMYK print, after linearising each of the colour channels but without doing any colour calibrations. I'm going to title this print "Clown Vomit". I'm not sure why the magenta layer decided to print so strongly this time around but it overpowers all the other layers (I even printed the cyan layer twice to try to get its density up).



I'm not sure how much time or effort I should put into it to be honest, I'm sure there are things I could be spending my time on that are much more likely to produce good results.

 

[nmp]

I've been attempting to use the Jacquard Solarfast UV-sensitive dyes to make CMYK prints. This stuff really does seem more designed for fabrics rather than paper as it's truely a pain to work with and the results seem extremely variable on paper. The worst aspect so far is that the colour density seems very low (but also extremely variable!), the yellow stains like crazy and the 'black' I can't get to print as anything other than a light chocolate brown...

This is my first CMYK print, after linearising each of the colour channels but without doing any colour calibrations. I'm going to title this print "Clown Vomit". I'm not sure why the magenta layer decided to print so strongly this time around but it overpowers all the other layers (I even printed the cyan layer twice to try to get its density up).



I'm not sure how much time or effort I should put into it to be honest, I'm sure there are things I could be spending my time on that are much more likely to produce good results.

On its own, it does not look so bad as a duocolor. Did each separate channel test print reflect the respective true color?

:Niranjan.

 

[AndrewBurns]

On its own, it does not look so bad as a duocolor. Did each separate channel test print reflect the respective true color?

:Niranjan.

No the Solarfast dyes aren't anything close to CYMK. Cyan is actually their blue dye, yellow is more of an orangey-yellow, magenta is actually their violet dye and the black turns out brown.

I'm not going to bother following through with this I think, although it is tempting to use cyanotype and coffee toned cyanotype as the cyan and black layers respectively. Of course if I did that I'd have to print the colour layers out of order due to chemical necessity (toned cyanotype black layer first, then regular cyanotype, then yellow, then magenta).

For reference here are some coffee toned cyanotypes I made today on two different kinds of paper. It's crazy how much faster, easier and better quality these 4 prints are vs. something I could get with the solarfast dyes.

 

[nmp]

No the Solarfast dyes aren't anything close to CYMK. Cyan is actually their blue dye, yellow is more of an orangey-yellow, magenta is actually their violet dye and the black turns out brown.

I'm not going to bother following through with this I think, although it is tempting to use cyanotype and coffee toned cyanotype as the cyan and black layers respectively. Of course if I did that I'd have to print the colour layers out of order due to chemical necessity (toned cyanotype black layer first, then regular cyanotype, then yellow, then magenta).

For reference here are some coffee toned cyanotypes I made today on two different kinds of paper. It's crazy how much faster, easier and better quality these 4 prints are vs. something I could get with the solarfast dyes.

Those are nice. A lot of people use cyanotype as the base layer for tricolor gum process.

I wonder is the paper plays a role here (specifically the pH) which might be shifting the shades. Have you tried different papers - don't know if you are using buffered paper or not, but that might be a variable to look at.

:Niranjan.

 

[KYsailor]

No the Solarfast dyes aren't anything close to CYMK. Cyan is actually their blue dye, yellow is more of an orangey-yellow, magenta is actually their violet dye and the black turns out brown.

I'm not going to bother following through with this I think, although it is tempting to use cyanotype and coffee toned cyanotype as the cyan and black layers respectively. Of course if I did that I'd have to print the colour layers out of order due to chemical necessity (toned cyanotype black layer first, then regular cyanotype, then yellow, then magenta).

For reference here are some coffee toned cyanotypes I made today on two different kinds of paper. It's crazy how much faster, easier and better quality these 4 prints are vs. something I could get with the solarfast dyes.

Andrew, really nice, I particularly like the bridge on the far left . Looks like minimal staining - care to share any info on the papers/process - I assume you use "regular" coffee.....

Dave

 

[AndrewBurns]

Andrew, really nice, I particularly like the bridge on the far left . Looks like minimal staining - care to share any info on the papers/process - I assume you use "regular" coffee.....

Dave

Thanks

Far left and far right are the same paper, which is just a cheap 230 gsm hot-press watercolour paper re-branded by the local art store (the store is called Gordon Harris, but they don't make the paper). It's great because it basically doesn't stain, but unfortunately they seem to have changed paper supplier or something recently because the new paper doesn't print anywhere near as nicely and has a weird linear texture to it.

The middle two prints are a different paper I'm trying. They're Fluid brand hot-press 300 gsm watercolour paper. It prints really nice with a super smooth tonal range, but unfortunately stains a lot more than the cheap store-brand stuff. Still acceptable I think, would look fine with a cream coloured matt board when framed.

My process is to wait at least a day after printing the cyanotype, pre-soak in water for a few minutes then lay the print face down in coffee for 30 minutes before washing, no bleaching. The coffee mix is 6 tablespoons of instant in 3 litres of water (I do a few prints at once). Whether the paper stains a lot or not seems entirely dependent on the paper, and I assume how it's sized and with what. I wish the fluid paper had whatever the store brand stuff has that makes it stain-free as it really is much nicer paper.

 

[KYsailor]

Thanks

Far left and far right are the same paper, which is just a cheap 230 gsm hot-press watercolour paper re-branded by the local art store (the store is called Gordon Harris, but they don't make the paper). It's great because it basically doesn't stain, but unfortunately they seem to have changed paper supplier or something recently because the new paper doesn't print anywhere near as nicely and has a weird linear texture to it.

The middle two prints are a different paper I'm trying. They're Fluid brand hot-press 300 gsm watercolour paper. It prints really nice with a super smooth tonal range, but unfortunately stains a lot more than the cheap store-brand stuff. Still acceptable I think, would look fine with a cream coloured matt board when framed.

My process is to wait at least a day after printing the cyanotype, pre-soak in water for a few minutes then lay the print face down in coffee for 30 minutes before washing, no bleaching. The coffee mix is 6 tablespoons of instant in 3 litres of water (I do a few prints at once). Whether the paper stains a lot or not seems entirely dependent on the paper, and I assume how it's sized and with what. I wish the fluid paper had whatever the store brand stuff has that makes it stain-free as it really is much nicer paper.

Thanks so much - I think I already had asked you about the details of the coffee, and maybe the paper..... it's winter here in the northern hemisphere and my mind is wandering from being in the house so long... so I am going to blame my lack of focus on the winter "blahs". Nevertheless thanks for the info - I know some papers I have used stain badly ( Arches Aquarelle) while others like some of the cheaper Canson XL watercolor papers are better - I sometimes see the fluid band here in the US - I may give it a try. Apologies for being so forgetful about this. BTW I really like the composition of the bridge image, it's great.

Dave

 

[AndrewBurns]

Here are the two prints on the Fluid brand paper, cropped in and in isolation the staining isn't that evident. The mid-tones are much smoother than the store-brand paper too, which looks a little patchy/mottled. My suspicion is that the sizing of the store brand paper is the cause of both low staining and mottled mid tones, perhaps the paper is just less absorbent in general.

Either way pretty happy with the results. These aren't very large prints (print area is about 6x8") but the level of detail is pretty good when zoomed in.

 

[KYsailor]

Just getting back in the dim room - decided to try a cyano on Hahnemuhle Sumi-e paper after watching a Bill Schwab video on coating of thin papers - I think it came out ok, but need to work on that coating technique and also the paper gets wavy and somewhat stiff when dry and if you look closely there are some "blurry" spots where the paper was not in full contact with the negative - probably need to rebuild my contact frame with better springs.... anyhow not too bad. Took this with a phone, the color temp seems to be a bit off the whites are actually quite neutral white - Anyone ever try to tone a cyano on this paper?

Dave

 

[MurrayMinchin]

Just getting back in the dim room - decided to try a cyano on Hahnemuhle Sumi-e paper after watching a Bill Schwab video on coating of thin papers,,,

Hi Dave, nice work as usual.

I did a quick spin through Bill's yootoob channel and couldn't find the one on coating thin papers...any chance you have the link stashed for easy retrieval?

 

[KYsailor]

Hi Dave, nice work as usual.

I did a quick spin through Bill's yootoob channel and couldn't find the one on coating thin papers...any chance you have the link stashed for easy retrieval?

it is actually the one about world cyanotype day - he does a HPR and a Sumi-e print and shows how to do the thin Sumi-e by wetting the back and sticking it his coating station and using a roller to apply the solution. Here is another I did on a piece of cheap "tracing paper", did three and this one was the best and didn't rip in the processing....

Dave

 

[MurrayMinchin]

it is actually the one about world cyanotype day - he does a HPR and a Sumi-e print and shows how to do the thin Sumi-e by wetting the back and sticking it his coating station and using a roller to apply the solution. Here is another I did on a piece of cheap "tracing paper", did three and this one was the best and didn't rip in the processing....

Dave

Thanks. Managed to find it here, starting at about the 10 minute mark:

 

[MurrayMinchin]

His method (for 80gsm) varies greatly from what I've been using with 30gsm Kozo.

I've been tearing the paper a bit larger than the image, to give a thin pure black border. I found coating the paper when dry to be near impossible in that the paper kept absorbing well past where the brush strokes were. This was a test with just water and you can see how far it kept absorbing past the image area:



What I do now is first place the paper on a sheet of glass then brush the paper with distilled water, ensuring it lays flat and is well coated. Then I pat dry with paper towel until the liquid sheen is off the paper, and coat with sensitizer right out to the edges. The pre-moistened paper takes up sensitizer very evenly. Once coated it stays on the glass and is placed on a horizontal surface with a fan blowing air over it for at least 30 minutes until dry. It stays stuck to the glass and dries very flat. The processed prints are also dried on glass.

Here are a couple tests showing the torn edges and coating the whole paper. Later, when 'serious' prints are done, I'll do a better job of tearing for a cleaner more balanced border:



Getting close to ordering some hand made Gampi ranging from 21gsm to 30gsm. Kinda gives my stomach butterflies!

 

[KYsailor]

His method (for 80gsm) varies greatly from what I've been using with 30gsm Kozo.

I've been tearing the paper a bit larger than the image, to give a thin pure black border. I found coating the paper when dry to be near impossible in that the paper kept absorbing well past where the brush strokes were. This was a test with just water and you can see how far it kept absorbing past the image area:

View attachment 391998

What I do now is first place the paper on a sheet of glass then brush the paper with distilled water, ensuring it lays flat and is well coated. Then I pat dry with paper towel until the liquid sheen is off the paper, and coat with sensitizer right out to the edges. The pre-moistened paper takes up sensitizer very evenly. Once coated it stays on the glass and is placed on a horizontal surface with a fan blowing air over it for at least 30 minutes until dry. It stays stuck to the glass and dries very flat. The processed prints are also dried on glass.

Here are a couple tests showing the torn edges and coating the whole paper. Later, when 'serious' prints are done, I'll do a better job of tearing for a cleaner more balanced border:

View attachment 392000

Getting close to ordering some hand made Gampi ranging from 21gsm to 30gsm. Kinda gives my stomach butterflies!

Murray,

Thanks for that information - I am used to working with 140-190 lb papers, so the sumi-e seemed very thin to me; however I see that there are many types of papers much thinner. I will have to give this a try and see how it works, especially for the drying steps. I am just sort of experimenting with these thinner papers just to see how they looked in cyano. I had done several photogravures on the sumi and I really like the prints.

BTW those are nice prints, clearly not cyano - Pl/Pt or kallitype I assume... but good tonality and Dmax.

Again thanks for the tips....

Dave

 

[MurrayMinchin]

Murray,

Thanks for that information - I am used to working with 140-190 lb papers, so the sumi-e seemed very thin to me; however I see that there are many types of papers much thinner. I will have to give this a try and see how it works, especially for the drying steps. I am just sort of experimenting with these thinner papers just to see how they looked in cyano. I had done several photogravures on the sumi and I really like the prints.

BTW those are nice prints, clearly not cyano - Pl/Pt or kallitype I assume... but good tonality and Dmax.

Again thanks for the tips....

Dave

Thanks...they are untoned Argyrotypes. Have Palladium on hand for when the hand made Washi arrives.

I tried Clearprint 100% cotton Vellum, and found it was waaaay too wavy & crinkly for my tastes. Love those long Washi fibres and how white areas in the image are pretty much transparent when in solution

 

[MurrayMinchin]

The video below has some interesting things to try. I believe he's using unsized Gampi of about 20gsm. He also mentions in the comments that he puts very little sensitizer into the brush at any one time. Coating on felt is also interesting. In the test photo in post #715 it shows how liquids spread when on a flat surface...maybe the felt inhibits the spread? Will have to try it, especially if I want the traditional brush effect around images. Lots of open ground for discovery!

 

[KYsailor]

Thanks again - that is interesting - I coated on a smooth surface then carefully put my coated paper in some drawers I use for drying. I had some old unused thin synthetic carpet, that was similar to felt. I lined the drawers with that so there would be some "air" under the coated paper. It still dried kind of wavey, next time I will try to put some weights on the paper like he did. Clearly this gentlemen is a serious alt photo practitioner, The vacuum table and UV set up is beautiful. My equipment is clearly on the amateur side of things, homemade contact frame and UV box. I do like his tool for handling the paper and I was amazed at how flat it dried and was easy to remove from the wooden surface.

In retrospect, my cheap tracing paper ( I think I bought it at Michael's craft supply on a lark - was there with my wife) actually came out fairly well - after overnight in the press - I might attempt to laminate it onto a silver foil ( al la Dan Burkholder). I have made some chine colle intaglio prints and the same basic technique should work for a damp print, a foil and backer by running it through the press. I should look into the washi paper - I think I have seen it at our local art supply store.

Again thanks for all of the ideas to think about.

Dave

 

[AndrewBurns]

A recent coffee toned cyanoptype

 

[MurrayMinchin]

A recent coffee toned cyanoptype

Hi Andrew...are you using pin registration methods, and if so, why the double set?

 

[AndrewBurns]

Hi Andrew...are you using pin registration methods, and if so, why the double set?

Yes I am, although because I'm only doing a single exposure on this sheet it's not actually that useful (other than lining my screen up to the sensitive region of the paper).

The main reason for the holes is that I originally designed my setup so that I could tile together multiple exposures onto a single sheet of paper with perfect registration between them. To do this, I built my LCD display (used as a digital negative) and UV light source into a single box with handles that I can pick up and holes that locate onto pins that are part of my registration board. The registration board itself sits flat on the table and has a number of pins sticking up that can be used to both hold the paper and also locate the exposure unit in different places relative to the paper.

In theory for making prints larger than my LCD screen I could make one exposure in one location, pick up the exposure unit and put it down onto another set of pins that locate the screen in a different location to the first exposure and the two exposures could be blended together into a single print. This didn't work in practice, but I still use the setup for making single-exposure prints because it works well.

In most cases I'm exposing A4 sheets which fit between the registration pins and so don't need any holes cut (I just tape the paper to the board so it doesn't move) but this print was done on 12x16" paper which was large enough that I had to cut holes in it to clear the pins. I cut the holes in the paper with my laser cutter, you can see two of them are oval to allow for the paper to change length a little without buckling.

 

[MurrayMinchin]

Yes I am, although because I'm only doing a single exposure on this sheet it's not actually that useful (other than lining my screen up to the sensitive region of the paper).

The main reason for the holes is that I originally designed my setup so that I could tile together multiple exposures onto a single sheet of paper with perfect registration between them. To do this, I built my LCD display (used as a digital negative) and UV light source into a single box with handles that I can pick up and holes that locate onto pins that are part of my registration board. The registration board itself sits flat on the table and has a number of pins sticking up that can be used to both hold the paper and also locate the exposure unit in different places relative to the paper.

In theory for making prints larger than my LCD screen I could make one exposure in one location, pick up the exposure unit and put it down onto another set of pins that locate the screen in a different location to the first exposure and the two exposures could be blended together into a single print. This didn't work in practice, but I still use the setup for making single-exposure prints because it works well.

In most cases I'm exposing A4 sheets which fit between the registration pins and so don't need any holes cut (I just tape the paper to the board so it doesn't move) but this print was done on 12x16" paper which was large enough that I had to cut holes in it to clear the pins. I cut the holes in the paper with my laser cutter, you can see two of them are oval to allow for the paper to change length a little without buckling.

Egad...can't imagine the difficult, head scratching, innumerable testing effort behind those three paragraphs!

I used to use sharp & unsharp masking techniques enlarging 4x5 negatives, so have a glimmer of insight into what you describe.

Thanks for the info

 

[AndrewBurns]

Egad...can't imagine the difficult, head scratching, innumerable testing effort behind those three paragraphs!

I used to use sharp & unsharp masking techniques enlarging 4x5 negatives, so have a glimmer of insight into what you describe.

Thanks for the info

Check out this thread (particularly page 2 and 3) for some details:

Using an LCD screen as a 'digital negative' in alt-process contact prints

Yeah I'm not ready to give up just yet, I still have a few more things I want to try and I had a similar battle with the light field correction that now works quite well. I think the hardware and software parts aren't insurmountable but the physical and chemical processes of actually producing...

www.photrio.com

Frustratingly close to working, but not working and not really repeatable. So rather than spend more effort trying to tile exposures I'll have to be satisfied with printing ~8x10 sized prints for now and I'm working on a UV enlarger to let me make larger prints in the future.

 

[MurrayMinchin]

Check out this thread (particularly page 2 and 3) for some details:

Using an LCD screen as a 'digital negative' in alt-process contact prints

Yeah I'm not ready to give up just yet, I still have a few more things I want to try and I had a similar battle with the light field correction that now works quite well. I think the hardware and software parts aren't insurmountable but the physical and chemical processes of actually producing...

www.photrio.com

Frustratingly close to working, but not working and not really repeatable. So rather than spend more effort trying to tile exposures I'll have to be satisfied with printing ~8x10 sized prints for now and I'm working on a UV enlarger to let me make larger prints in the future.

Thanks but no thanks. I use the minimum computery techno gadgety thingies possible to get my digitally enlarged negatives to where I need them to be!!!!