[botticelli1972]

I agree blue is not the correct result, just the one that happens the most often. For all the becquerel images I have made only three were not blue/blueish. They are truly beautiful and what have perplexed me and keep me going to try and achieve perfection. I think part of the secret is long development(as Gerard stated so long ago)in subdued lighting, it is what I am working on now. In my initial tests I have found that a plate developed 24 hours with lower light levels makes grays and whites not blues and blacks. I just tried one for 48 hours and it came up fogged, many possibly reasons for the failure. I have also been testing with letting the plate sit longer between iodine and camera exposures. Sometimes I feel that there are too many variable to try. Failure at perfection is exhausting, sometimes Ill accept a blue one just to have something to look at-Larry

[botticelli1972]

Latest pic from this past weekend. If it was not for the staining I would say it was the best I have done in a while. The staining is from the fixing stage, I didn’t have enough in the tray, I need to get one of Alan’s glass oval vessels made for me. Did cold gilding for 4 hours development was 6 hours. Was taken on a partly sunny day EV 12-13 through a 13:20 exposure at f/5.6 with my 8″ Dallmeyer.

 

Attachments:

You must be logged in to view attached files.

[botticelli1972]

Just be careful of any paper product labeled as “buffered” they contain calcium hydroxide to counteract acids from wood pulp lignin. They will tarnish your plates in a few years. Only use 100% cotton rag paper and/or boards. Also beware of papers listed as “Archival” unless they say they are 100% cotton rag, because if they are not “archival” is just another term for “buffered”. -Larry

[botticelli1972]

As you may know becquerel plates are very susceptible to staining and tide lines during the liquid phase of processing. When I first started I would always get dark lines from pouring on the gilding solution (see upper background of pic below). I read in an old text the process of cold gilding, which is basically to add the gold during fixing and I use a modified form of this. I fix in sodium thiosulfate in tap(well)water and if the image is “good enough” I remove the excess fixer with a pipette till just a little more than a meniscus of fixer is left over the whole plate. I use a solution of 2 grams of gold chloride in a liter of distilled water, I just add 10cc into the edge of the tray so it mixes with the hypo already in there before contacting the plate. No need to make fresh hypo or mix part A and B before hand and the gold in distilled water lasts nearly forever. You can watch the gold react with the plate almost instantly. If you want you can just leave it in and let it work (I have left it in as long as 12 hours before longer and the gold plates out in a cool pattern that will ruin the image), or if you are in a hurry pop the whole tray in the microwave, as long any metal is covered by a liquid it will not spark, for about 25-50 seconds depending on how much liquid is in the tray, just till it starts to steam you don’t want bubbles on the surface of the plate. If you do get bubbles use a pipette to get rid of them with a stream of fixer/gold or you will get un-gilt spots where the bubbles were. Too long and it gets too hot and will fog the plate. Now I do have to say here that I do this only with sold .999 silver sheet, no copper backing on my plates. I have no experience trying this with a copper base and I do not know how they react to bath gilding but if others are doing it with hotplates and copper based plates I would imagine it would work also.

 

Larry

 

Attachments:

You must be logged in to view attached files.

[botticelli1972]

Here are two shot with my new F/2.9, the 1/4 plate full length pose with the vintage matte and preserver was 26 second in full sun Ev 14.6 @ISO 100 0.2 stop bellows extension. The half plate bust pose was 45 second full sun 0.5 stop bellows extension. The half plate is probably 1/3 stop overexposed but still nice. Both were developed under amberlith for 3 hrs, fixed in hypo, and gilt in the microwave.

 

I think I need to set up a light colored background the black background seems a bit harsh.

 

Larry

 

Attachments:

You must be logged in to view attached files.

[botticelli1972]

Sorry about that this is my first photo included post hope these help someone, and I would appreciate any feedback-Larry

 

Attachments:

You must be logged in to view attached files.

[botticelli1972]

As a contemporary daguerreotyist who also happens to have a Masters of Art and C.A.S. in Art Conservation, I would not even think of treating my own Daguerreotypes. Fixing split cases, casting missing case halves and cleaning the glass is one thing, cleaning the image is asking for trouble. They made it 150+ years just fine and really bad things happen to cleaned images, not including accidental wipes, scratches, water spots, mercury migration, loss of hand coloring and formation of additional corrosion sites. The tarnish is not only sulfide but part silver and when removed leaves a microscopicly rough surface that has more surface area for the promotion of corrosion and tarnish. Thus once removed, tarnish reappears faster and with more vigor. The more times you clean them the more silver, and thus the more image particles, you remove.

If you MUST clean (ie. you cant even see an image or it is so disfiguring that the piece is worthless as is) start with a 4% technical grade ammonia bath followed by deionized water rinse baths only. You would be surprised how much of that same grime that is on the underside of the glass is also on the surface of the plate. Drying a plate without spots is an art.

I will not get into tarnish removal as that is best left to experts who have done hundreds of plates but current research uses a platinum electrode and not an aluminum pan. I will leave that at that.

Larry

[botticelli1972]

you win some you loose some. But the funny thing is that I am pretty sure I saw the same image previously at a local antique sale a few years ago from the same photo dealer so he has had it a while, maybe next year I will get it.

As for the floating head thing I once read how they did it, it is actually a patented process so an accurate description is out there. This is what I remember of it: white painted wall and a ring of white triangles, points in, solid white at the perimeter (imagine a large spinning bicycle wheel with small paper triangles attached at the perimeter) that is spun with the sitter behind.

[botticelli1972]

Alan, are you still working Becquerel or are you exclusively mercury at this point?-Larry

[botticelli1972]

The crystals work much better than the prills. You can also use liquid iodine as you would get at a drug store but it is messy, others have done this with success for large plates to get an even surface and it was recorded in the historical record as a viable option. It might be possible to evaporate out the liquid and leave behind only the solid, thought I have not tried this. I get mine (crystals) from tack shops (horse supply) it is used as a foot fungus treatment. Here is a link.

http://www.wilsontack.com/catalogue

At the bottom of the page they list 2 oz for $12. order two and it will fill the bottom of a 4×6 Pyrex with a thin uniform layer that will last years.And yes, daguerreotpy is an undertaking, but one worth the effort.Larry

[botticelli1972]

I have tried the opposite end of the scale, using a blue filter. My theory was that since they are only sensitive to UV/blue why not send only blue light to the plate. I did not do much with this as an 80A filter has a factor of nearly 3 stops which in Becquerel is a lifetime. In a somewhat subjective way I think the images were "better" but the extra long exposures were problematic.

jdanforth wrote:By cutting out the UV I’m hoping that it will remove some of the icky spotty effects that I see on skin tones.

This is the exact reason that Southworth & Hawes used/championed the "lighted Camera." The cause of the spotty effect is that the blemishes, scars and pimples on humans are usually red in color and thus show as black spots on a persons face on a finished plate. The white interior of their camera had a slight fogging effect that conceals these defects, they still show but are greatly softened. It also gives a somewhat soft focus look which is pleasing to many (softens wrinkles, ect). Check out the chapter on technique written by Mike Robinson in the recent book "Young America the Daguerreotypes of Southworth and Hawes" by Romer et all.

Larry Shutts

[botticelli1972]

I have done this quite a few times but have never made a "keeper" image. I have never heated them or dipped them, just polished away the old image. It will take a bit more than red rouge to get the old image and tarnish off. The silver sulfide tarnish layer actually consumes/combines with the silver and leaves a very rough surface once it is removed the more tarnish the worse the surface, also old matt marks are often deep and very hard to get rid of. If you polish gently and are not too picky about the matt marks and irregular surface from the tarnish you can often make two or three attempts before you polish through to the copper, assuming the original user got it right on the first try. I have polished old ones multiple times thinking they were still good and then during gilding the thin silver allowed the copper to react with the gold and make orange stains all over the image. One other thing is that the old plates often have the edges bent back and you need to correct the focus to compensate for the plate not being flat. -Larry

[botticelli1972]

The whole reason I started thinking along this line is that lately I just have not been getting a good polish, and it is getting quite annoying. When I first started I had a small converted 3450 RPM bench grinder and two wheels, one fine muslin and one canton flannel, and some rouge sticks and things were great. I didn’t even bother with hand finishing, it was not necessary they would come out perfect. I am beginning to think I just have too many toys now and cannot keep track of what works and what does not. I now have two buffers, one slow and one fast, and enough wheels and different compounds to fill a trunk. My biggest problem right now is getting tinny pits all over the plates. I make so few dags a year that the time I have to work on it needs to be successful. Last night I decided to go back to the basic set up and it seems to have helped but I still am getting some pits, they are more problematic than the faint polish lines from the final buffs.

Right now I only have Domet flannel instead of Canton flannel for a final wheel, I think even though the Domet is said to be the softest, I prefer the Canton. I think it left less lines. Could this be the source of the pits?

Has anyone tried a chamois final wheel? How about one of the hard leather covered wood wheels?

-Larry

[botticelli1972]

Thanks for the response John. I have read all your articles many times and have been wanting to try the method since I was able to see your work in Kansas City last year.

I checked and fixed the plate last night to see if anything did happen. First of all the amberlith exposure I tried did nothing as far as pulling an image out. But after fixing I did see "something". It was not an image but a I could tell where the plate was masked by the holder during exposure and that an effect had occurred. Also, there were a lot of very tiny balls of mercury on the surface, I would imagine that was caused by leaving it in for 18 hours under vacuum. I assume this is the same as when left in the heated apparatus too long. The mercury balls did not appear attached as they would roll around on the surface in the fixer.

For my set up I do have one of the plastic vacuum desiccators with a very old scientific pump that has a pulley and a separate motor. The vacuum gauge is attached to the pump, but I did do a test last night and it held 27" of vacuum for 4 hours with out a drop in vacuum. When I get a chance Ill get some more plumbing and set the gauge inline for more accurate readings.

In order to get light exposure during bromine fuming is it possible to use a clear glass/plexi bromine box? or is it best to expose it to light after the bromine step and before the final iodine? I am still a ways off from bromine and I was planning on building new sensitizing boxes, mine are from when I first started and are a poor design, I have learned much in the last few years.

One other thing, is it necessary to burn off the mercury before re-polishing? I was thinking it might interfere with the process or is it just not necessary and will be eliminated with polishing?

Larry

[botticelli1972]

I believe that you are incorrect, as I have always included a UV blocker with my amberlith to prevent accidental fogging of the image, thus it is indeed the red end of the spectrum that does the development and I would imaging that red LED’s would work and might be a nice way to accurately control times. I use the old fashioned sun technique which as we all know is unpredictable. I have heard of some people using the dark IR filters to develop becquerel dags with success but I have not tried it myself.-Larry

[botticelli1972]

This will be my second year, last year in Kansas City was a great experience for me. It was nice to meet everyone. The whole group of people are great, both the collectors (which far outnumber us) and the daguerreotypists. I think the best part was seeing in person the work of the other daguerreotypists, I had nothing to compare my work to up to that point. It made me feel like part of the club so to say when the other practitioners looked at my plates and declared them fine examples of the craft, it felt like positive justification for a few years of hard work.

I actually live 20 miles outside DC so this is in my backyard so to say. If anyone has and questions about visiting DC just let me know Ive been here off and mostly on for the last 10 years. Larry

[botticelli1972]

I have not tried this as I am a Becquerel guy, but I have heard of others using the heater from an old coffee pot for their mercury setups. They are cheap, readily available and thermostatically controlled to just about the right temperature for consistent development times.-Larry

[botticelli1972]

Early on I purchased a large roll of amberlith and have found it works very well and predicable. It is a standard that has been used for years. I have also tried deep yellow, orange and red gels sourced from art supply stores. The yellow worked but the image looked weak, the orange was decent (it was close in color to the amberlith)and the red developed way to fast and I actually watched the image appear and then the whole plate eventually go dark in just a few minutes. I have the amberlith taped to a piece of UV blocking plexi and use binder clips to attach it to the film holder and then pull the dark slide. I have used the same piece for five years.-Larry

[botticelli1972]

I also have recently been switching from a magenta to a slightly earlier deep yellow/orange. I have found the magenta to produce a light blue image with grayish whites and good total range while the earlier yellows produce a more black and white look with a touch of sepia/brown tonality but less total range. Both are nice too look at and I have been just timing the colors, about 3 min in my box, instead of inspecting and enjoying what ever develops out.-Larry

[botticelli1972]

I know that a few people here in DC did a workshop quite a few years ago at the Naval Observatory, that must have happened 10-15 yrs ago. I was told they made several quality images. I do not know who lead the group only that one of the participants is a co-worker of my wife at the Smithsonian, and it was her first and only time making daguerreotypes. It is possible, and I have always believed that one of the images was published in the Susan Barger book on the science of the daguerreotype(I believe it is the lead photo to the last chapter) but this could be a miss-attribution. That image, I think states, was taken at the Naval Observatory but does not list a maker. Susan Barger’s husband is Robert Shaler who might possibly have lead the class. Someone else may have more information than I on this class from the past.-Larry

[botticelli1972]

For $400 you could by numerous vintage plates that have been wiped or otherwise spoiled and re-polish them. Then you get the bonus of the mat, preserver, and usually 1/2 a case. I have done this on occasion with interesting results. I have found several ruined vintage items for $5-10 each at flea markets and such. The only catch is that the plates are often bent or wavy and sometimes they have corrosion or scratches that will not come completely out, but for $5 each for the whole package it is hard to complain.-Larry

[botticelli1972]

You might just have to step up to 11 x 14 to fit a true 8×10 plate. I have made my own film holders using the information in the book titled Primitive Photography: a guide to making cameras, lenses and calotypes by Alan Greene. It has plans for all sorts of cameras, lenses and holders. It has a wet plate bent but the ideas are easily modified for dag plates.

[botticelli1972]

I have tried both long and short iodine cycles and have found, personally, that I like the first series colors the best. I found the second and longer iodine series to make muddy images and the exposure times are very long, in the 20 min @ f 4.5 in full sun range. I use first series colors exclusively now. In my fuming box it takes usually between 90 seconds and three min to get a good color, depending on the temperature of my dark room, which is unheated and with no A/C. In the winter it has taken as long as 10 min. I am not so picky about the color, after 90 seconds I check every 30 seconds and pull it when it has gone past orange. Sometimes the plate takes iodine faster and the color goes in the purple/blue range and I do not worry about it. They all make good images and the variety of resulting tones are pleasing, keeps it interesting as to how it will come out.

For developing I have found for my plates, using a Kodak Print Projection Scale to determine timing, that full development takes place at 45-50 min. in full sun under amberlith. The image begins to show quickly in less than 5 min. Sometimes I have even noticed self developing highlights that appeared while still in camera. Any less than 45-50 min. and the image is not fully realized and any more and it begins to fog, it is a very fine line. Others have reported having much different results. Get yourself one of these translucent projection scales and try for yourself. Do not buy the new ones as the are low quality machine printed, find an old one on eBay which is a developed piece of film with subtle graduations. -Larry

[botticelli1972]

I do not know if this helps but I did notice an article by Grant Romer in the bibliography for the Kilgo book on Thomas Easterly. It was titled something like "The Daguerreotype in American and England after 1860" Published in the History of Photography 1 sometime in the 1970’s ( I do not have the exact reference with me at this time). I have not located the article yet but possibly it has references to persons of interest practicing in the 20th C.

[botticelli1972]

I recently had a single daguerreotype hung in a large group photography showing. I presented the dag in a wall mount frame with a longish wire on the reverse. The long wire allowed the frame to droop downward slightly to reflect the darker carpeting of the gallery. This was to prevent it from reflecting the white walls and ceiling. As far as theft goes, I also was worried about it as mine was the smallest piece in the show. At this gallery all works were insured and if it was taken I would have received the asking price minus the gallery commission.

At the Eastman House, they do the opposite for dags. They paint the ceiling black and put wedges under the dags to angle them up.

Lighting is an issue. The old dags were polished for window lighting i.e. final polishing lines horizontal. This is why sometimes they look quite poor (hazy) in museums that light them with overhead spots. Most modern dag practitioners seem to polish for overhead lighting i.e. final polishing lines vertical. This would appear to be the best option as most gallery and potential purchaser lighting is ceiling based spot lighting

[Author]

Posts