Oil Problems & Comprehensive Workshops.

Terry King (KINGNAPOLEONPHOTO@compuserve.com)
Sat, 16 Aug 1997 03:57:35 -0400

Message text written by Robert Newcomb
>It's difficult to know if it's a problem with ones inking method, the ink
or
the soak or the exposure. I don't have the answer as Terry didn't ever get
back to me on this one.
I<

Oops ! Sorry !

In my standard instructions for oil and bromoil I go through the stages to
produce the matrix ready for inking up from which point the procedures are
exactly the same. In my experience one expect from an oil print just what
one can from a bromoil that is the same detail and range of tones. In fact
one can, if one is feeling perverse, make one's oil or bromoil print look
just like a silver gelatine photograph.

I have just bought three of the Photo Club de Paris annual reviews from
around 1905 with long articles on oil printing with examples by the great
names of the time which illustrate very well the control the process gives
over what appears in the picture and what tonality tha various elements
should have. The results show why the oil process was so popular.

The difficulty Mel seems to be having stems from underexposure if only the
shadows are showing, in other words the parts under the thinnest parts of
the negative. Longer exposure will bring out the highlight detail under the
denser parts of the neg.

As to inking, if you have access to Litrhographic ink in tubes use them as
the ink stays moist longer. A single drop of linseed oil will loosen the
ink so that it will take on the highlights. If the ink is too soft use a
miniscule amount of light magnesium carbonate to thicken it.

I will including bromoil and oil printing in the programme for the
workshops I am organising in Richmond. The workshops will cover everything
from calotype to dye transfer .

Terry King