No image at first attempt
Home › Forums › Contemporary Daguerreotypy › No image at first attempt
- This topic has 3 replies, 2 voices, and was last updated 3 years, 4 months ago by ropel.
-
AuthorPosts
-
July 31, 2021 at 6:42 am #18485ropelMember
Hi all –
So I was set and ready for my first stab at some sort of image formation.
Unfortunately no luck at first try and looking forward to experiment further.
I was hoping anyone could help me to determine which parameter to change first.To keep things affordable, I was roughly following Jon Hilty’s approach, but with a silver-plated piece of copper instead of a modified mirror.
(https://cdags.org/resources/a-lower-cost-approach-to-making-daguerreotypes/)My steps were as follows:
– Electro-plating of small piece of copper (5x6cm) with silver electrolyte
– Polishing (rough for now, but the mirror effect is surely there)
– Fuming with 10% povidone-iodine (used to treat wounds for horses) – left it in for about 1.5 hours.
– Clear coloration visible – blue near the edges and yellowish at the center
– Contact print under enlarger with inkjet printed positive transparency for 8 minutes (guesswork, no EVs yet)
– Attempt to Becquerel development with Rubylith holder for 4 hours and strong LED light (construction work type)
– No image formation visible…Looking forward to give it another shot, but not sure what to change first.
Goal is to get to image formation, before getting things ‘right’ 😉
I have an image attached of the plate when it got out of the Rubylith holder.Some thoughts I have:
– Wrong moment in fuming cycle?
– Not enough contrast in inkjet positive?
– Too short / too long exposure? Enlarger light sufficient?
– Becquerel development not working too well with LED light source?Apologies for the newbie questions. Any thought are highly appreciated!
Cheers,
Roy
Attachments:
You must be logged in to view attached files.July 31, 2021 at 10:05 pm #18489dragosMemberIn what you describe, there are more experimental steps and a few obvious wrong ones.
If you ask me, change everything and make things by the book.
Daguerreotype is a process where there are many variables and everything influences everything, even in its more simple version as Becquerel. Starting with the quality of the mirror, the thickness of the silver layer, quality of fuming box, quantity of iodine in the box, fuming time (it should be seconds or minutes, not hours), color of the plate to know when to stop the fuming (sometimes a few seconds make the difference), exposure, etc, etc, everything is very important. One wrong step could mess your whole process. There’s a reason why very few people do this.I strongly recommend you read this whole forum if you don’t want to work blindfolded and invest a lot of money and time in frustration. The most important thing is to understand how the process works, so that you are able to make your own adjustments.
August 7, 2021 at 12:55 pm #18490ropelMemberHi Dragos –
Thanks for crafting up a fast reply. Appreciated!
In response: surely my steps are experimental, but experimentation is part of the game and part of the fun IMHO (keeping it safe of course). I am well aware that Daguerreotype is one of the more difficult processes to master and sensitive to missteps along the way. At this point I aim for image formation, not for a top notch plate any time soon.
I don’t think I started fully in the blind. Of course I have explored information here. As mentioned, I decided to start my journey based on Jon Hilty’s article. I chose this route primarily because the povidone iodine is less hazardous (though clearly still needs to be handled with care), and I am willing to spend longer waiting times and slower learning cycles. So I wonder when do we really do things by the book? Indeed, few people do this, but I assume also today’s masters had to go through the learning curve? I am eager to learn and see where it takes me.
In my efforts, I have so far managed to electroplate nicely and get a first polish done. I have crafted simple but decent holders (with Rubylith) and a fuming box (with a glass slide closure). The 10% povidone iodine makes the box design somewhat less critical, but does demand for much longer fuming times.
Most uncertainties for me are in the realm of exposure and development I guess. Trying to move forward slowly, and take out some of the more experimental steps. Maybe this will indeed put me on the trail of frustration, we’ll see. There can always be a point to bail out. Grateful for any more advice forward.
August 10, 2021 at 7:42 am #18491ropelMemberHi all –
Brief update on my second serious attempt today, finally being able to also use some bright sunlight.
So thrilled to have my first image on a silvered plate!I know it ain’t pretty: neither the polish, nor the exposure and surely no gilding yet, but I am still pleased to see a proper image appear. 🙂
As it turns out, the main issue was the exposure time for contact printing. Measured EV value now and steered from there toward a 10 minute exposure (EV 6). I guess it would have required more time still.
It’s been quite a journey to craft and collect stuff (at reasonably low cost) to get to this experiment.
Wouldn’t have been able to manage without the wealth of info here.
So glad to now have a starting point from which to optimize and improve.Cheers,
Roy
Attachments:
You must be logged in to view attached files. -
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.