An interesting video on palladium printing from the Monochrom's output.

[Keith]

This has possibly been seen at RFF before and I wasn't sure where to put it ... in the printing forums or here. Obviously the technique can be used for any digital output but I've always wanted to start an MM thread because it's the closest I'll ever come to owning one! 😀

The video meanders a little and is quite long .... but I still found it fascinating! LINK

 

[Wouter]

Fascinating is the right word for it. Thanks for the link.

 

[shadowfox]

A beautiful video on platinum printing process.

That gentleman has a spotless darkroom.
What discipline.

 

[Vince Lupo]

I've always loved printing in platinum-palladium, though of course those materials aren't the cheapest (well, the platinum anyways). Would love to start doing it again, though I'd have to make an exposure bed again (it is possible to simply use the sun to expose the print, but it's a bit less predictable than a UV exposure bed).

Is he just printing the neg on regular acetate or something more specialized?

 

[icebear]

I had seen it before but thanks for sharing and reminding me again.

 

[shadowfox]

Vince, I'm guessing but I think it's one of those specially made transparencies that can trap inkjet inks. What I find interesting is he taped a piece of paper so he can print the greyscale for judging the print later.

 

[1joel1]

I think I miss Pt/Pd printing the most. This was inspiring. Perhaps.... someday.

Thanks,

Joel

 

[Vince Lupo]

The one thing that I found with platinum-palladium printing is that because it has such a long tonal scale, you have to expose and develop the negative a bit differently (at least for film, that's what I found). Luckily you can really snatch quite a bit of shadow detail out of the Monochrom's files, so that helps the final image. The other thing I found (likely due to that long tonal scale) is that the plat-pall prints tend to be flatter than a conventional gelatin-silver print -- but that can certainly be adjusted to personal taste by the type of developer you use, the balance of platinum to palladium (even a drop of liquid can make a big difference), the type of paper, as well as the light source you're using.

A great possibility here for further investigation!

 

[Calzone]

Vince, I'm guessing but I think it's one of those specially made transparencies that can trap inkjet inks. What I find interesting is he taped a piece of paper so he can print the greyscale for judging the print later.

My guess is Pictorico OHP Transparency Flim.

Cal

 

[2WK]

Yea as soon I saw that video I immediately began researching the process and supplies. It looks a lot more do-able than regular silver printing. At least not needing an enlarger, darkroom etc. The chemicals, platinum & palladium didn't seem outrageously expensive. I do have a large format epson 9600 & a monochrom, so I'm one step closer anyway 🙂

 

[Vince Lupo]

The one thing you'll likely need to make is an exposure bed. Not really a big deal -- just some fluorescent light fixtures, and high-UV bulbs (very important that they are this type). Also a contact printing frame, and one of those glass 'squeegees' (much easier to spread the materials than a brush). Bostick and Sullivan should have everything you need. And Office Depot should have Crane's 100% cotton paper (you need to use 100% cotton paper, so it won't fall apart when you immerse it in the developer as well as the wash), which is the cheapest and best stuff to use.

Price-wise, the platinum is the expensive part -- I remember the last time I bought a very small quantity of it, it was over $120.

 

[Vince Lupo]

Actually, just noticed this particular kit on Bostick and Sullivan's site: http://www.bostick-sullivan.com/cart/product.php?productid=1117&cat=49&page=1

 

[2WK]

^Yea I was checking out that kit as well. They also have pretty nice printing frames. The exposure bed will be the difficult part for me, but I have a handy carpenter friend, maybe I can convince him of this project. I have also been watching videos on the process, and instead of a squeegee, a lot of guys use a glass push rod which seems to work really well.

Good to know about the paper source thanks. I'm going to check out that transparency as well... thanks Calzone.

 

[lam]

This was very inspiring. Thank you for sharing!

 

[DominikDUK]

Interesting to see that he chose a subject that is a classic medium format or large format theme and less of a 35mm Rangefinder theme. Goes with the process on the other hand I've seen some platinum print made from 35mm (digital internegative) that looked great in platinum but were subjects that are more in the tradition of images that one would make with a 35mm camera e.g. wildlife photography.

Thanks for the link

 

[Calzone]

Yea as soon I saw that video I immediately began researching the process and supplies. It looks a lot more do-able than regular silver printing. At least not needing an enlarger, darkroom etc. The chemicals, platinum & palladium didn't seem outrageously expensive. I do have a large format epson 9600 & a monochrom, so I'm one step closer anyway 🙂

Be aware that there are some very real hazards of poisoning via heavy metals.

Read Dan B.'s book on "Making Digital Negatives For Contact Printing." His first book uses an imagesetter to get the resolution, but Dan has a new book that uses printers.

Cal

 

[Vince Lupo]

Yeah sorry the glass push rod is what I meant by 'squeegee'. Just couldn't think of the proper name of it.

As far as an exposure bed goes, you don't need to be fancy. When I was platinum-palladium printing way back when, what I did was to go to Home Depot and buy 5 of these fluorescent lights that (I guess) are supposed to fit under a kitchen cupboard. I think they were each about 18" long or so (they may possibly come with a frosted plastic cover, in which case you should remove that). They were already pre-wired with a plug and a switch, as well as the built-in ballast and all that. So I got 5 of them, then got a piece of plywood about 3' x 4', and then mounted the lights onto the board (each light spaced about 3"-4" apart). Then I mounted a power strip onto the plywood, plugged all the lights in, voila. Of course, you have to source the high-UV lights, but I think that Home Depot or a good electrical supply shop should have them. Only other thing you need to do is to either make up some kind of legs for the plywood unit, or in a pinch you could just use some books to hold it up. The lights should be no more than about 8" or so from the contact printing frame. Wish I still had mine, or I'd take a photo of it for you!

BTW if you want to read 'the Bible' on alternative processes, try to find a copy of 'The Keepers of Light' by William Crawford.

 

[Vince Lupo]

These fixtures might possibly work: http://www.homedepot.com/p/GE-23-in...dercabinet-Light-10169/202024437#.Ud2_IY5As-Y

And I just remembered that the bulbs are unfiltered blacklights (in other words, not the dark psychedelic purple ones). I think they have the highest UV of any fluorescent bulb.

 

[helvetica]

stitching

stitching

Interesting to see that he chose a subject that is a classic medium format or large format theme and less of a 35mm Rangefinder theme. ...

If you watch when he is shooting the scene, he takes multiple shots while positioning. I suspect that he is stitching them together for an ultra-high-resolution image. In the "best of Monochrom" thread on this site, there are some fantastic stitched images made with longer lenses (90 'cron APO?) that have the shallow depth of field of long glass, but the wide field of view of a 35 or 24mm lens.

 

[sepiareverb]

BTW if you want to read 'the Bible' on alternative processes, try to find a copy of 'The Keepers of Light' by William Crawford.

An excellent book that should be re-issued, tho there are quite a few on Amazon. Mine is falling apart from use.