Palladium/Platinum/Albumen 411

Hi,

I have some rather "bullet-proof" 4x5 negs that are pretty useless for
standard enlarging, but someone has said that they might be good candidates
for alternate processing.

Looking through all of my old photography books, I seem to like the Albumen
prints better than the platinum and palladium prints. I know you really need
to see one of these prints first hand to ge the real effect, but some
decently scanned examples should be good too. I am really leaning towards
the albumen prints, again, based on the look of the prints that are decades
old in the books.

Does anyone have any posted examples of both? Or experiences with any of
them? I saw the price for the Platinum kit at Photographer's formulary,
and...OUCH!! $ 45.00 for 8 4x5s?!

Thanks....

In article ,
"Dickless Cheney" wrote:


Does anyone have any posted examples of both? Or experiences with any of
them? I saw the price for the Platinum kit at Photographer's formulary,
and...OUCH!! $ 45.00 for 8 4x5s?!

Thanks....

You sure thats for Platinum only, I bought a kit several years ago
and it was $90 for the same increment.
--
LF Website @ http://members.verizon.net/~gregoryblank

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong,
is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918

In article ,
"Dickless Cheney" wrote:


Does anyone have any posted examples of both? Or experiences with any of
them? I saw the price for the Platinum kit at Photographer's formulary,
and...OUCH!! $ 45.00 for 8 4x5s?!

Thanks....

You sure thats for Platinum only, I bought a kit several years ago
and it was $90 for the same increment.
--
LF Website @ http://members.verizon.net/~gregoryblank

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong,
is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918

"Dickless Cheney" wrote in message
om...
Hi,

I have some rather "bullet-proof" 4x5 negs that are pretty
useless for standard enlarging, but someone has said that
they might be good candidates for alternate processing.

Looking through all of my old photography books, I seem to
like the Albumen prints better than the platinum and
palladium prints. I know you really need to see one of
these prints first hand to ge the real effect, but some
decently scanned examples should be good too. I am really
leaning towards the albumen prints, again, based on the
look of the prints that are decades old in the books.

Does anyone have any posted examples of both? Or
experiences with any of them? I saw the price for the
Platinum kit at Photographer's formulary, and...OUCH!! $
45.00 for 8 4x5s?!

Thanks....
Are these negatives very high in contrast or just very
dense but normal contrast? Printing out methods tend to be
somewhat self-masking, that is the areas exposed lose
sensisitivity with exposure. This results in a lowering of
shadow contrast which allows increasing exposure to get
details in the highlights while retaining shadow detail. It
works best with high contrast negatives but won't help with
those that are normal contrast but very dense.
A relatively cheap way to test this is to obtain POP or
Printing Out Paper. This is exposed in direct sunlight in a
printing frame. POP, under the Centenial name, is available
from Bostick & Sullivan: http://www.bostick-sullivan.com
and others. In order to make the resulting images permanent
they must be treated in a toner and fixed. The usual toner
contains Gold chloride so is not cheap but there are
alternatives. The Bostick & Sullivan site is a good one to
start out with for alternative processes of all sorts. Dick
Sullivan is the formost provider of materials for
platinum/paladium printing and also has materials for carbon
and other processes.
Salt prints and albumin prints are fairly easy processes.
Both are printing out processes. The materials are not too
expensive except for the gold toner. Not much gold is used
so its not in the same class is platinum or paladium.
You can also try a reducer on the negatives but this has
the hazard that the negativs can be ruined. There are a
number of reducers, the choice again depends on whether the
negatives are excessively contrasty or excessively dense.


--
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA

"Dickless Cheney" wrote in message
om...
Hi,

I have some rather "bullet-proof" 4x5 negs that are pretty
useless for standard enlarging, but someone has said that
they might be good candidates for alternate processing.

Looking through all of my old photography books, I seem to
like the Albumen prints better than the platinum and
palladium prints. I know you really need to see one of
these prints first hand to ge the real effect, but some
decently scanned examples should be good too. I am really
leaning towards the albumen prints, again, based on the
look of the prints that are decades old in the books.

Does anyone have any posted examples of both? Or
experiences with any of them? I saw the price for the
Platinum kit at Photographer's formulary, and...OUCH!! $
45.00 for 8 4x5s?!

Thanks....
Are these negatives very high in contrast or just very
dense but normal contrast? Printing out methods tend to be
somewhat self-masking, that is the areas exposed lose
sensisitivity with exposure. This results in a lowering of
shadow contrast which allows increasing exposure to get
details in the highlights while retaining shadow detail. It
works best with high contrast negatives but won't help with
those that are normal contrast but very dense.
A relatively cheap way to test this is to obtain POP or
Printing Out Paper. This is exposed in direct sunlight in a
printing frame. POP, under the Centenial name, is available
from Bostick & Sullivan: http://www.bostick-sullivan.com
and others. In order to make the resulting images permanent
they must be treated in a toner and fixed. The usual toner
contains Gold chloride so is not cheap but there are
alternatives. The Bostick & Sullivan site is a good one to
start out with for alternative processes of all sorts. Dick
Sullivan is the formost provider of materials for
platinum/paladium printing and also has materials for carbon
and other processes.
Salt prints and albumin prints are fairly easy processes.
Both are printing out processes. The materials are not too
expensive except for the gold toner. Not much gold is used
so its not in the same class is platinum or paladium.
You can also try a reducer on the negatives but this has
the hazard that the negativs can be ruined. There are a
number of reducers, the choice again depends on whether the
negatives are excessively contrasty or excessively dense.


--
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA

Richard Knoppow wrote:
A relatively cheap way to test this is to obtain POP or
Printing Out Paper. This is exposed in direct sunlight in a
printing frame. POP, under the Centenial name, is available
from Bostick & Sullivan: http://www.bostick-sullivan.com
and others. In order to make the resulting images permanent
they must be treated in a toner and fixed. The usual toner
contains Gold chloride so is not cheap but there are
alternatives.

I've used Centennial "POP", and liked it very much, except for the sorta
"plum" tone it has after gold toning. I'm next going to try selenium
toning.

POP paper is supposed to work best with contrasty negatives, and the
Centennial version is much cheaper than the prices quoted by the original
poster.

Here's a link to a POP gallery:
http://www.albumenworks.com/popgallery.html

Richard Knoppow wrote:
A relatively cheap way to test this is to obtain POP or
Printing Out Paper. This is exposed in direct sunlight in a
printing frame. POP, under the Centenial name, is available
from Bostick & Sullivan: http://www.bostick-sullivan.com
and others. In order to make the resulting images permanent
they must be treated in a toner and fixed. The usual toner
contains Gold chloride so is not cheap but there are
alternatives.

I've used Centennial "POP", and liked it very much, except for the sorta
"plum" tone it has after gold toning. I'm next going to try selenium
toning.

POP paper is supposed to work best with contrasty negatives, and the
Centennial version is much cheaper than the prices quoted by the original
poster.

Here's a link to a POP gallery:
http://www.albumenworks.com/popgallery.html

There's also Kallitype which is supposed to be like platinum printing but
with silver salts. The examples I've seen look very nice. Photographer's
Formulary has kits for both..
--
darkroommike

----------
"Dickless Cheney" wrote in message
om...
Hi,

I have some rather "bullet-proof" 4x5 negs that are pretty useless for
standard enlarging, but someone has said that they might be good
candidates
for alternate processing.

Looking through all of my old photography books, I seem to like the
Albumen
prints better than the platinum and palladium prints. I know you really
need
to see one of these prints first hand to ge the real effect, but some
decently scanned examples should be good too. I am really leaning towards
the albumen prints, again, based on the look of the prints that are
decades
old in the books.

Does anyone have any posted examples of both? Or experiences with any of
them? I saw the price for the Platinum kit at Photographer's formulary,
and...OUCH!! $ 45.00 for 8 4x5s?!

Thanks....

There's also Kallitype which is supposed to be like platinum printing but
with silver salts. The examples I've seen look very nice. Photographer's
Formulary has kits for both..
--
darkroommike

----------
"Dickless Cheney" wrote in message
om...
Hi,

I have some rather "bullet-proof" 4x5 negs that are pretty useless for
standard enlarging, but someone has said that they might be good
candidates
for alternate processing.

Looking through all of my old photography books, I seem to like the
Albumen
prints better than the platinum and palladium prints. I know you really
need
to see one of these prints first hand to ge the real effect, but some
decently scanned examples should be good too. I am really leaning towards
the albumen prints, again, based on the look of the prints that are
decades
old in the books.

Does anyone have any posted examples of both? Or experiences with any of
them? I saw the price for the Platinum kit at Photographer's formulary,
and...OUCH!! $ 45.00 for 8 4x5s?!

Thanks....

On Fri, 29 Oct 2004 15:03:39 GMT, "Dickless Cheney"
wrote:

Hi,

I have some rather "bullet-proof" 4x5 negs that are pretty useless for
standard enlarging, but someone has said that they might be good candidates
for alternate processing.

Looking through all of my old photography books, I seem to like the Albumen
prints better than the platinum and palladium prints. I know you really need
to see one of these prints first hand to ge the real effect, but some
decently scanned examples should be good too. I am really leaning towards
the albumen prints, again, based on the look of the prints that are decades
old in the books.

Does anyone have any posted examples of both? Or experiences with any of
them? I saw the price for the Platinum kit at Photographer's formulary,
and...OUCH!! $ 45.00 for 8 4x5s?!

Thanks....


Did you consider making a contrast reducing mask ?

Regards,

John S. Douglas, Photographer - http://www.puresilver.org
Vote "No! for the status quo. Vote 3rd party !!