Processing to final prints

The whole process involved in shooting large format paper negatives has been a steep learning curve.

My first shoot involved exposing 4×5 sized pieces of Ilford Multigrade paper loaded into dark slides in the dark room before finally shooting it in a large format camera. I quickly realised that this resulted in a problem with excessive contrast and that the paper is especially sensitive to blue light, rendering any hint of blue sky hugely over exposed. To mitigate this I have experimented further with pre-flashing the paper to lower its contrast. The experiment involving this has resulted in a fair amount of wasted time and paper, but finally I found a decent combination that delivered a good result. I am settled on pre-flashing the paper for 2 seconds at F.8 prior to loading into dark slides. I also resolved that exposing at ISO 2 instead of ISO 6 which I had researched online presented a better result.

The images I was getting have plenty of imperfections which I feel add to the aesthetic of the process. The most exciting of these are my own finger prints visible on the negatives. I like the idea that each negative is unique and is linking to me as its creator. Serendipity is the word that best describes this discovery! I could work to limit the artefacts visible on the negatives, but I find the marks they add build on the aesthetic of the paper negative process.

Once negatives are exposed, the darkslides are returned to the darkroom for dish processing. Again, through a process of trial and error I have decided that development by inspection is the best process to opt for as many of the negatives need to be removed from the developer at exactly the correct moment to avoid too denser images. I have read about creating my own Developer using the Caffinol C recipe online which is a developer home-brew. Mixing cheap instant Coffee, crushed Vitamin C and Soda Crystals can create a weak one-shot developer. I am yet to experiment with this as I have a load of premixed developer to exhaust first.

Incorporating the landscape into the printing process

This moves me forward to the next area of project. I decided that it would be interesting to attempt to incorporate part of the landscape within the images. Having researched how Sally Mann feels linked to the images she produces, I was keen to develop a similar strategy.

On my last shoot I recovered a small amount of loose soil from the camp and I have recently experimented with mixing dissolved soil into the photographic chemicals. This has enhanced the scratches already present in the process and again builds on the aesthetic. While the negatives are wet and processing, the emulsion remains soft and so tiny particles of the soil become embedded within the images. While this feature is subtle, I am pleased to be able to incorporate a tiny fragment of the spaces being photographed into the final images in some way. I have found the best way to incorporate the soil is to add a muddy wash stage prior to final wash and drying. 

Once the negatives are dried the next dilemma presents itself. Initially I tried contact printing the 5×4 negatives, but this was not hugely successful. The images do not print well as the final image is printed through the paper backing of the negative and therefore makes them much harder to print. I have read about treating the paper with hot Bee’s wax to make the backing more opaque, but this is an experiment I decided not to pursue. The reason for this is that the resulting final 5×4 contact print will still be only 5×4 inches in size and I want to create large exhibition prints for this submission.

With this in mind, I have been scanning the 5×4 negatives on an Epson flatbed scanner and creating digital files to output from. Whilst not ideal, this process does give me the opportunity to enlarge the images to a size I am happy with. I am committed to limiting the amount of digital manipulation of the files as I want them to remain authentically analogue based.

Test Prints

For many years I have experimented with print output processes using my own images and those I have shot commercially. The thing with digital monochrome prints is that they have never looked quite right. I have used the Inkjet Giclee process many times with various types of different paper. Many of the papers available have characteristics which add to an image, but there was never anything that matched a true monochrome print. They all seem to lack depth or shadow areas become flat and muddy. A cheaper alternative was to print black and white images on to RA4 colour paper using the C-Type process. This is a cost effective option but the papers available tend to have a plastic feel that does not match that of a traditional black and white wet print. The other factor with the C-type process is that by using colour paper there is always a slight hint of colour in the prints.

Finally I discovered that Ilford now have an online printing service where users can upload images to print in just the same way as any other professional printing lab would. The crucial difference here is that Ilford will print on to their own Ilford Multi Grade Monochrome paper therefore delivering a true black and white print of a digital file. The costs are comparable with professional C-Type prints but the results are neutral in colour and without the synthetic feel of colour paper.

I have had some test prints made by Ilford and I am delighted with the results. The images look so much better on authentic black and white paper. Whilst the process I am using within this project does include some digital processing, I am thrilled to be able to output to true monochrome paper. The print quality is beautiful in comparison to other processes so I can safely say I have settled on my method of final output.

Top two 10×8 images printed on Fuji Crystal Archive RA4 colour paper, bottom three 10×8 on Ilford Multi Grade paper. Not clear to see from a quick photograph but the difference is significant.