Allan Janus asked whether anybody was making calotypes - I made some salt
prints for the first time a few weeks ago from a Polaroid type 665
negative. I agree with Gord Holtslander's message about this film being a
great way to get started, but the contrast of the negative I was using
didn't really suit salted paper. One of the main problems I've found with
type 665 film is that you can't get a usable print and negative from the
same exposure - there seems to be about a stop and a half difference
between what's ideal for negatives and prints. With a Polaroid 600SE
camera, at least you can make those kind of adjustments, and you get to
see right away what the results are, but it's still expensive, and the
print size is still relatively small. In the long run I'm going to have
to move up to a view camera.
I was surprised how easy salted paper was. You do, however, need
contrasty, long tonal range negatives. And I used a gold-thiocyanate toner
to try to get warm purple tones but I left the prints too long in the
toner and ended up with very cold blue blacks. The gold-borax toners are
probably better. Anybody tried toning salted paper in selenium?
The alternative process I've used most is cyanotype, which is lovely and
simple, and gives beautiful blues. But the colour isn't always right for
everything. I tried gum a few years ago but found it didn't give
sufficient density unless you were willing to muck around with multiple
printing. Recently I've been experimenting off and on with the
woodburytype process but haven't made much progress, so I'm on the look
out for a good simple plain paper process. Has anybody tried Mike Ware's
argyrotype or chrysotype process?
Philip Jackson
pjackson@nla.gov.au