Re: Still learning Pt/Pd

Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

From: Eric Neilsen (e.neilsen@worldnet.att.net)
Date: 05/15/00-08:49:34 PM Z


Nick, If you got good results before or almost acceptable prints, what was your
print coating solution and what is it now?. (i.e. 10 drops A , 2 drops B, 12
drops Plat/Pall). It could very well be that 1 drop of 3% is too much. Dilute
it to 1/2, 1/4 strength. Adjust your ratio of platinum to palladium. It may be
that remaking your negative is the answer, or perhaps just a tissue mask or a
partial printing with a total blocking mask, card board or ruby lith, etc.
Should you be able to make a negative that will print with out any masking?
Yes. Will you, Perhaps. You may also change that way that you wish to
interpret your negative / print after you have it in your had.

Perhaps you should print that 21 step scale with the H2O2 left out and see what
the addition does with your printing environment and chemicals and go back and
evaluate what values you assign to your digital output.

Remember it does it always work the first time and new approaches offer new pit
falls.

Happy Hunting
EJ Neilsen

Nick Makris wrote:

> My thanks to Judy, Kerik, Eric, Carl and Jeffrey for their input to
> resolution/tonal seperation problem I'm having with my recent prints. Some
> clarification is required here.
>
> First, let me say the problem is very subtle and that the negatives (8X10)
> I'm using are digital negs from a Lightjet. The one in particular, contains
> detail in both the shadows and the highlights and I have previously had
> better results from this neg. and in conjunction with the print frame I have
> been using.
>
> This leads me back to the Ferric Oxalate change that I made recently, where
> I am now using a one solution formula with no Potasium Chlorate. In mixing
> the sensitiser, I am using equal arts of FO and PT/PD with one drop of H202
> (3% drugstore variety undiluted).
>
> The negs can be printed for either the highlights or the shadows but not for
> both and some confusion exists herein about which way to proceed. My
> preference is to print these negs as they exist and to change my coating
> solution to include or not include something as opposed to changing my negs
> or my developer. After researching the my archives I found that either
> Postassium Chlorate, Potassium Dichromate, Ammonium Dichromate or H202 in
> various strengths may produce the desired results, but I don't have a clue.
>
> The key here is that these negs seem to have a contrast range that is
> greater than what my procedure will print, but contain detail where I expect
> to see detail.
>
> It could be that the addition of H202 (which I was using previously with
> success) is adding unneed contrast. I would have thought that with no
> Postassium Chlorate I would have needed some additional contrast.
>
> Some direction along these lines will be *very much appreciated*.
>
> As for differentiating between tonal seperation and resolution - I also have
> a hard time with that. These negs seems to have good resolution and tonal
> seperation at both ends, however, I would be hard put to describe the
> difference between them except to say that I am able to see differences
> within the same tonal range.
>
> Many thanks,
>
> Nick

--
Eric J. Neilsen
4101 Commerce Street, Suite #9
Dallas, TX 75226
214-827-8301
http://e.neilsen.home.att.net
http://www.ericneilsenphotography.com


Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 06/13/00-03:10:19 PM Z CST