Wednesday, December 22, 2010

DTR on PP400 with EFKE 25

This is an excellent result. It might not look pretty, but it shows near perfect DTR onto the 20x24 PP400 material using the EFKE 25.  As you can see where I wrote "OK" there is a small margin where the image is good. That's where the reagent was thick enough. Where it was too thin, an incomplete DTR reaction took place. However, zoom in on the sepia toned portions, and see how the thinness of the reagent restricted the lateral diffusion, or point spread function (PSF) producing quite a sharp positive.

Even so, the thicker reagent portions are still plenty sharp.  That same margin on the corresponding negative also showed a good density, perhaps a little too high, but good enough for this experiment.
There it is at the top. Notice that the negative also developed outside of the border, proving that a negative can be developed without contact with the receiver material (again).

Below that is a negative produced by a spread on some Kodak premium glossy inkjet paper, which fell apart and produced a texture that you can see if you zoom in. You can also see some very good spots where the reagent spread is near the "right" thickness.

Look at how sharp this stuff is!

Thanks to 20X24 for supplying some receiver material for this experiment. There is no doubt that the PP400 receiver surface could be used for New55, if the stock it was on could be made thinner. Right now it is very appropriately thick, just right for a 20X24 print, but twice as thick as what we'd want for 4x5. 


Anonymous said...

Looks promising. Resolution looks very good and accutance seems also very good. Nice way to bring in the New Year!

Clifford Kiracofe

Bob Crowley said...

The EFKE 25 in such a fast, high energy reagent get a bit of a speed boost, maybe a full stop. The DTR boosts it again even more. I consider that room to spare, but I am going to continue to test at ISO 25 as you see here, so there will be some dense highlights. These examples are presumed to have self terminated, at 1 minute, and therefore contrasty. Next I will concentrate on reagent spread and have rollers in the lab being set up now.

Anonymous said...

Bob, Sounds good.

I located a copy of Ansel Adam's Polaroid book and it is truly inspiring reading and visually: Polaroid Land Photography (New York: New York Graphic Society, 1978. 1st Revised ed.)

I note that AA tested and then rated (ASA) his film for the print, and also for the negative depending on what he wanted and visualized for final output.

Each differed. For example to produce negatives, with 55 he rated first at 32 and then later at 20 as he noticed shifts in batches he tested.

So, IMO as you are testing it could be logical to test for print as output and also for negative as desired output. It may be that there is some significant difference.

I would imagine folks will experiment with the print, say scan and work on it in whatever software. Or scan the neg and work on it digitally. Or get the cleanest neg and best neg you can and work on it via traditional methods. Personally, I would like to test all options, see how they would work and then select a workflow depending on my visualization and so on of a particular image. Traditional or hybrid whatever it takes.

In the AA book you can see not only his own results but also other well known artists' work in color and in black and white.

Great to hear about your experimental results. Cliff.

Clifford Kiracofe

Bob Crowley said...

I have his series but not the polaroid book, but I remember seeing it in art college. At this point, I'm just glad to get some speed increase rather than decrease on the negative side, as this suggests the reagent might be throttled back via a little pH decrease, which makes it easier to make, handle and package.

Readers might be quite interested in your fine images on Flickr, if they are not already. Search Cliff's name to see them.

Anonymous said...

Bob, thanks for the kind words.

Some increase in negative speed sounds excellent and useful. Four main tweakable components in developing process: the developing agent, the alkali, the preservative, the restrainer. So somewhere in there is the right mix for an optimal result in this project.

On this, I can recommend also an old technical book by two authors from the Eastman Research Labs:
T. H. James and George C. Higgins, Fundamentals of Photographic Theory (New York: John Wiley, 1948). I found this for $1 at a used book sale a couple years ago. It is focused on the chemistry and the sensitometry aspects. Deals with emulsions, development, tone reproduction and the like. Really gets one into the world of silver from a technical perspective. Has some useful footnotes to earlier technical literature. Cliff

Clifford Kiracofe

genxnaturist said...


I saw link to your blog from impossible project.I am big supporter of type 55 film. I like fact it produced nice images and same time produced negative which I in turn would use to make van dyke, cynotype and platinum prints.

What polariod did was totaly stupid. They had marketed and promoted products and created nitch group of artists and fans. To suddently stop production and to distory so much equipment was sad. I hope what you do succeeded.

Bob Crowley said...

Hi and thanks

Of source you know we are not trying to recreate 55, but to have a field processable negative system with a quality near 55 - sharp, high resolution, low grain, nice tonal scale etc. Send us an image and a link to your site as we would be interested in seeing some of these prints!