|
|
Creating Negatives Using a PC |
After being introduced to the image manipulation possibilities using computers and programs such as Adobe PhotoShop, the amateur photographer may wish to combine such with traditional Silver gelatin photographic developing processes. Our project, then, seeks to investigate the feasibility of using personal computers to generate negatives which can then be taken to the darkroom by the amateur photographer. Varying paper types and the oils we applied to increase the paper’s translucency, we hoped to create a negative that produced a print comparable to a traditional print. We believed that using a thin paper and an oil which would increase the ability of light to pass through the paper thus creating the desired image.
We traveled to Abbo’s Alley on a overcast, yet pleasant afternoon. The weather stayed the same until we were ready to leave, when the sun suddenly came out—one picture before the end of our roll. We were using a Canon AE-1 Program SLR camera and Kodak 400 Max film. We had the film professionally developed at Wal-Mart 1hr. Photo Processing Lab and then proceeded to scan the pictures using an Apple Color One Scanner 1200/30 in Wood’s Lab 133. After scanning the images, we converted them to black and white using Adobe PhotoShop. Since our subject matter was mostly monochromatic, we found that most of the pictures had very little definition once converted to black and white. We chose the image with the most definition and visual interest and created a negative image of it.
Next we proceeded to print the negatives using a Hewlet Packard 692C DeskJet printer. We used a variety of papers, both professional and handmade. Then we coated the papers with either vegetable or olive oil. Taking two plates, we poured oil onto them and then place each paper onto the oil, allowing the oil to absorb into the paper without submerging it. We then allowed them to dry for about 36 hours. They were still wet and we needed to begin the developing process, so out of desperation, we carefully blotted them. This removed any excess oil quite admirably and we were able to develop that morning.
We began the developing process with the 35mm negative so that we would have a standard by which to judge the other prints. The qualities we were looking for in a print were a clear, sharp focus and distinct areas of light and dark. Then we used the paper negatives to create contact prints using the enlarger as a controlled light source. The final step was to develop the prints in the standard manner for silver gelatin photography.
Of the three papers used, the best negative produced was from the typing paper; however, even the prints produced from these negatives failed to maintain a consistent and distinct image quality across the face of the print. This paper, however, did produce a good contrast between light and dark areas of the image. All of the other papers, to some degree, failed to effectively block enough light; thus, they likewise failed to create distinct areas of white in the final print. The handmade papers, especially, were unable to capture enough ink to effectively block out the light.
The transparencies produced excellent detail, combined with a broad spectrum of light to dark values of black and white with very little fog. We used two different transparencies, one printed with an inkjet printer and the other with a laser printer. The print generated from the inkjet printer transparency was of poor quality because of the inability of the ink to adhere to the surface of the transparency, producing instead a series of horizontal lines across the image; a poor image on the negative leads to a poor image on the print. Using the laser printer, we obtained a high quality transparent negative which in turn produced our best print, which possibly surpasses even the traditional 35mm. negative and print. With the transparency, one finds a much sharper image as individual characteristics of the landscape—branches, leaves, grass, etc—all become more distinct and separate from each other. Furthermore, the transparency produced a greater contrast between the black and white values; with the transparency, both an absolute black and an absolute white were present, whereas with the traditional negative, these were replaced with shades of grey. The disadvantage of the transparency is that an observant viewer—especially if the image were enlarged—would see the dots the printer deposits to create the image.
In general, we believe olive oil produced better, clearer prints: there was less fog present in the print and the image was sharper, with more detail and contrast. The exception to this is the thick handmade paper with 50 sizing. For this print, the vegetable oil produced the better print, as judged using the same criteria listed above. Thus, it is not merely the oil or the paper that determines the final quality of the print. The quality is determined, rather, by the translucency (or lack of such, as the case may be) of the paper and paper’s ability to absorb ink. For a summary of our findings about each print, see our Chart
Our research shows that the combination of paper and oils which we used, while showing possibilities for such media, cannot really be used effectively in transferring digital images to paper. The results with the typing paper show that there is promise in the notion of using this method, but that the relationship between the oil and the paper needs to be further explored. The transparency, which was not coated with oil, actually produced the best image. What needs to be investigated is a method that allows light to pass through in certain areas, but also restricts it from passing through in other areas. The relationship of the paper and the ink also could be another consideration. The prints that produced the clearest image all had the ability to absorb and retain the ink; especially with the handmade paper, the ink adhered only superficially, allowing more light than was beneficial to pass through. Future extensions of this project could include using a paper that is more absorbent than the ones which we used.
Burkholder, Dan; Making Digital Negatives for Contact Printing; Bladed Iris Press; Carrollton, TX; 1999