test images: screw-in BLB UV box

From: [email protected]
Date: 07/10/05-11:31:00 AM Z
Message-id: <071020051731.2929.42D15B5400088D5E00000B7122007613949D0104970E9BD20A0B9A06@comcast.net>


I have posted a few test prints of my trials with cyanotype and POP using the UV light source made with 6 screw-in BLBs.


Conclusions include: practice, practice, and more practice is needed with coating techniques. The first image (digineg) was probably not a good choice for cyanotypes, but I can enhance the print with hand coloring or the like (the scan posted appears about 1/3 - 1/2 stop darker on my computer than the print). But it helped as a test. I also tried cyanotype for one of the old negatives described below; those tests are also posted.

I really am enamored with the very dark navy blue tone I was able to get in the area that was not covered by negative (i.e., only glass between UV source and sensitized paper) so am wondering if the Pictorico is the problem - maybe the 13 watt bulbs just aren't strong enough to penetrate the substrate or it is my diginet; therefore, feedback at this point will be really helpful, before I go out and buy 20 watt bulbs. Therefore I made test with POP to eliminate the uneven-coating artifact. And use "real" negatives rather than "diginegs" ...so some feedback regarding exposure times other use with POP will be helpful.

Regarding the tests with Printing-Out-Paper (POP)

Having no large film negatives myself I sought out aid from my sister, the family genealogist, who had found some old large negatives among her father-in-laws things; she loaned some of them to me to try as contact prints. It came as no surprise that they had been stored all jumbled together in old Kodak or other processing-lab envelopes, now yellowed with age.

As I sorted the negs by size, placing each in an individual sleeve, I came across one that had part of an old and yellowed envelope flap stuck to it by the glue. I was able to chip the paper off gently with my finger nail, and, using a q-tip soaked in 90% rubbing alcohol, was able to take off some of the glue. Then, as I was considering what else I might use to remove more of the glue, I remembered my sister saying these larger ones were most likely from the late 30's and the other were from the late 30's and 40's, possibly being "nitrate" film! So onto the internet went I and came across a really scary government pamphlet, then a less scary booklet describing the horrors of, as well as ways to ID, cellulose nitrate film.

Yup! I think many of these are of said nasty film base, but with maybe only a slight fading on the 3.25 x 5.5 ones, but otherwise not showing the major signs of deterioration as described in the booklets. I certainly attempted no more cleaning and checked to make sure the fan on the light box was really keeping the interior cool (It was!). Going to keep them out of the rain also as I figure this is not a wise way to get nitric acid for an acid-bath pre-washing dunk for cyanotypes! Now I am searching my vintage camera books to find out more about the film sizes/possible cameras used.

Anyway, I did use some of these old negatives for POP printing before storing them in the freezer. They are posted, with notes, at the url given above.

Thanks in advance for your comments!

Judy Rowe Taylor
Mukilteo, WA
Art is a voice of the heart, a song of the soul.
jude.taylor@comcast.net or judyrowetaylor@enduringibis.com
Received on Sun Jul 10 11:31:15 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 08/25/05-05:31:51 PM Z CST