I agree with Daniel (below) by dealing with process, clear guidance, images to support audio - the process is made inevitably more accessible. Without Hype, without ego - really quite rare these days. Thanks Tom. Superb
great tutorial !! thank you so much... i was just inverting my image... and really struggling to get good prints, this has completely changed everything !
Thanks for the clear and very practical lessons. I am restarting a cyanotype project that I abandoned (failed at) a few years ago. I do think that my Canon 200 printer with its dye based inks will be ok if I can find the right paper to treat , coat and print on
In the Bostick & Sullivan comments on printing the Kallitype curves they provide there is a recommendation to change the Optical Density Setting of the printer (Epson) to -3. Do you make this printer setting change when you print the Chart Throb test print? Thanks so much for this clear and concise video. I have been attempting to nail down Kallitype printing for about a year now and have had some, but not very consistent, success. I love the process!
Yes, use the B&S printing technique on all your tests and prints. I'm testing some other colors besides yellow and hope to have a new video... sometime.
I love this very factual tutorial. Thank you. I have a question regarding printing the negative. My experience comes from Photopolymer Photogravure work where I am using Folex transparencies and Matte ink on an Epson SureColor printer which I was advised was more UV opaque than photo black. You mention that Matte black smears. Is this because of a reaction with the chemicals (I am planning to do cyanotype). I would appreciate you comment.
Thanks for the comment. My advice to avoid matte ink comes from my experience using it on Pictorico transparency film. If it doesn't smear on Folex, go for it!
Matte paper absorbs more ink than glossy paper, so matte ink is applied more thickly. Plastic films don't absorb ink at all, so the lighter application of glossy ink is better for them.
Thanks for the very informative video! I use a Canon Pixma printer and find the negatives printed on transparency media to be fairly pale - is this a question of the media used or the Canon inks? Do you think backlight film (used by estate agents for their window displays) might be a viable alternative if one took in to account the added exposure time for the more opaque surface?
Tom, thank you for the great video. Question: For the test strip you make to find the full black, do you need to put this exposure trough all the same process you use to develop the image correct ? (dev time, clearing, toning, fixing, etc) thanks!
Augusto, you should use the same steps and timing except the hypo clear and final wash. Both the toner and the fixer change the Dmax. You don’t care about archival permanence, so the wash steps don’t matter.
Hi Tom ))) Great video, and yes it seem very complicated. But okay, it seems like that I need to build this curve because each printer is different? And if you change printers then you have to make a new curve - is that right? Thank you for the video!
You'll at least have to try the old curve with the new printer, then adjust as necessary. If my technique seems complicated, the main takeaway is that your test print will tell you how to adjust the curve. You mainly need to know what will give a textured white and a textured black (the limits of your ability to show detail).
This video is awesome and I'm studying it carefully. There is one question that comes to my mind, about the transparency film: considering that a good digital negative is long-lasting, and it might be worth a little investment, is it worth to consider buying the Pictorico Pro Ultra Trans Film 184gsm, instead of the "regular" Pictorico Pro OHP Transparency Film 174gsm? Thank you very much!
Hi Gianandrea, I don’t see any advantage to the Ultra film. The manufacturer says “This "Ultra" version differs from standard "Pro Premium" transparency sheets in its excellent compatibility with Epson UltraChrome Photo Black K3 ink, high UV density, and higher capacity for ink absorption.” If you are getting adequate ink density from the less expensive version, there’s no need to change.
Great video. Can someone help clarify something for me? I see you mention the Bostick and Sullivan video which goes over creating a digital negative as well as the printing settings for the negative. Does this chart system replace the digital negative portion of the bostick and sullivan video? It seems like it is just a more refined process but if I am using their chemistry and curves wouldn't I just need to dial in my exposure times and it should be good to go? Thanks in advance.
To be honest, I haven’t tried B&S’s pre-made curve but there are too many variables that change your image. It’d be easy to try B&S’s curve and see what you get. In any case, assess and change as I showed in the video.
This is marvelous, Tom. I'm just getting started with platinum/palladium and you saved me many days of frustration. Like you, I'm a numbers guy and like this measurement-based approach. However, there's one thing I don't understand. In your second step you scan the first image (non0ChartThrob) image, then bring it up side-by-side with the digital original. You then apply the curve to that original and tweak the curve to match the imperfect first sample print. I don't get it. If the sample print is too dark in the midtones as compared to the original, for example, doesn't this further darken those midtones for successive prints? I'm sure there some logic or arithmetic I'm just missing here. Thanks!
You can see the dull-looking print (1B) at 10:00. It's not too dark. I concluded I was trying to hold detail in the dark quarter-tones and that was making the contrast too low. Instead of making the dark spot on the left cabbage an almost-black, I moved that density to the center-back area and let the left spot go true black. The midtones become darker but that gives a pleasing contrast to the brightest highlights, which begin to stand out. If you stop the video precisely at 10:12 you'll see 1B and 1C superimposed. Besides darkening the lows, I also pulled the lightest curve point up a bit. Remember that the mids and highs are very sensitive to changes in the curve. For 1D I pulled the highs up even a bit farther (see 10:32). I hope this helps.
Hola, muy interesante la información, permitame hacerle una pregunta ¿Cuál seria el medio para imprimir el negativo digital si quiero realizar una impresión en planino paladio?
hello tom, I appreciate your videos, very instructive; I would like to have a clarification: do you apply the curve before or after the inversion in negative? the results are totally different, how do you do it? Best regards, Gilbert
I apply my curves before inversion. Bostick & Sullivan recommends the opposite (and of course the curve would look totally different) but I don’t know why. Applying to the positive image makes it more intuitive to change the curve if needed (“the highlights are too light, so I’ll darken them” for instance).
Hi Tom, I followed the instruction for the chart throb. After I opened it in PS, Do I print the Chart Throb straight through in PS, or I have to use B&S method in order to create a print of Chart Throb for each alternative printing technique?
ChartThrob expects a scan but it’s worth substituting a picture. You’ll find out soon enough if it works. Alternatively, have a friend scan it for you. You only need the scanner one time.
Time it to see how many units are in a minute. Say there are 20 units in a minute. I’m not familiar with the NuArc but I’d guess you’ll need something between 3 and 7 minutes. That’s 60-140 units in this hypothetical example. Give your test strip 60 units, then cover part of it. Then give a series of exposures at 10 units, covering more of the strip each time.
Enlarging a digital negative is not advisable. You'll be enlarging the printer dots that make up the image. You might make it work if you print the neg at the highest resolution your printer can make, and don't make a very big enlargement. Why not just make a contact print though?
@@tnp651 I can just do that yes. I thought I would just have a master neg that can do all sizes by putting in an enlarger. Was just a though. Any current printer recommendations for up to 16/20
@@davidventura1424 Most alt printers use Epsons. The XP-700 prints 13" wide and the XP-900 prints 17"wide. The XP-900 is 50% more expensive for those few extra inches!
Yes, I just realized the problem. The site downloads a file called ChartThrob.jsx.txt. You need to remove the "(dot) txt" to use it as a script. Let me know if you still have trouble.
Thanks for getting back to me. That’s the first thing I tried to no avail. I must have tried 20 times in different ways but it still wouldn’t install. In the end I downloaded the file on my old PC and it installed straight away in PS 2020. I then copied the file from the PC to a thumb drive and transferred it to the Mac. I dragged the file into the appropriate folder and it works. Removing the .txt doesn’t work as the Mac still sees it as a text file.
Failing to install Chartthrob on a M1 Mac running Big Sur with Ps 2021 or a PC running Windows 10 and PsCS6 but neither open the script. Gives an error 23 at line 134. Have made sure to use the 662kb script file. Any suggestions?
For me, it’s the excitement of learning and exploring an old-time technique. Getting back in the darkroom is nostalgic for me, but I don’t want to lose the image control that digital provides. A hybrid process is the perfect compromise.
ink jet prints sit on top of the paper. these process are kinda burned into the paper chemically and the texture of the paper stands out. It also lasts way longer like those old photos that grandma used to have sitting in her house. That was the size of the negative so that was the size they printed at. Now we use digital to create bigger negatives to do the same printing but at a more modern and desirable size.
Wins with the first sentence. No coffee pouring, no superfluous B-roll, no stock music. Just “here is what I am going to do” and content. Bravo.
... except for that fuckin' opening whoosh! jeez, that's annoying!
I agree with Daniel (below) by dealing with process, clear guidance, images to support audio - the process is made inevitably more accessible. Without Hype, without ego - really quite rare these days. Thanks Tom. Superb
(blushing)
I love this! No nonsense, just the information I needed in a clear and well presented form. Thank you for sharing your knowledge and well done!
Thanks a lot! This is the most user friendly scientific correction method I’ve seen until now
Your video is SO thorough, clear, and helpful- thank you!!
Thank you. Just what I've been looking for. Much better than winging it and saves time and resources!
You are a true master. Thank you
great tutorial !! thank you so much... i was just inverting my image... and really struggling to get good prints, this has completely changed everything !
I will probably never do this in my life but that was really relaxing to watch.
Really informative and practical guide. Thanks so much
a very precise workflow, thanks for showing. Never before I understood to find the right gradation.
Subbbbbbbscribed. Thank you for sharing your knowwledge
Wow, amazing amount of knowledge and experience. Thank you
Thank you so much for this precise and compact information.
Legend! Thank you so much for sharing this.
Thanks for the clear and very practical lessons. I am restarting a cyanotype project that I abandoned (failed at) a few years ago. I do think that my Canon 200 printer with its dye based inks will be ok if I can find the right paper to treat , coat and print on
Thank you. Very well explained. I was always confused how to measure and edit curves after creation first test print. Now its clear!
This is so helpful and well-explained. I learned a lot from this.
Great video, Tom! I may revisit it some time when I desire to make digital negatives. In favorites.
In the Bostick & Sullivan comments on printing the Kallitype curves they provide there is a recommendation to change the Optical Density Setting of the printer (Epson) to -3. Do you make this printer setting change when you print the Chart Throb test print? Thanks so much for this clear and concise video. I have been attempting to nail down Kallitype printing for about a year now and have had some, but not very consistent, success. I love the process!
Yes, use the B&S printing technique on all your tests and prints. I'm testing some other colors besides yellow and hope to have a new video... sometime.
I've learned so much today. Thanks for the great video and links to resources!
Hello Tom,
thank you for this confirmation, I also apply my curves before BW inversion, and the result is satisfactory as well.
Regards,
Gilbert
you are a genius! thank you!
this video is so good!
Thank you. Is the process similar using Open Source Gimp? If not, are you aware of resources for that app?
Thank you ! Great work !
I love this very factual tutorial. Thank you. I have a question regarding printing the negative. My experience comes from Photopolymer Photogravure work where I am using Folex transparencies and Matte ink on an Epson SureColor printer which I was advised was more UV opaque than photo black. You mention that Matte black smears. Is this because of a reaction with the chemicals (I am planning to do cyanotype). I would appreciate you comment.
Thanks for the comment. My advice to avoid matte ink comes from my experience using it on Pictorico transparency film. If it doesn't smear on Folex, go for it!
Matte paper absorbs more ink than glossy paper, so matte ink is applied more thickly. Plastic films don't absorb ink at all, so the lighter application of glossy ink is better for them.
Thanks for the very informative video! I use a Canon Pixma printer and find the negatives printed on transparency media to be fairly pale - is this a question of the media used or the Canon inks? Do you think backlight film (used by estate agents for their window displays) might be a viable alternative if one took in to account the added exposure time for the more opaque surface?
@Marcco Can you recommend a current printer that produces good negatives?
Tom, thank you for the great video. Question: For the test strip you make to find the full black, do you need to put this exposure trough all the same process you use to develop the image correct ? (dev time, clearing, toning, fixing, etc) thanks!
Augusto, you should use the same steps and timing except the hypo clear and final wash. Both the toner and the fixer change the Dmax. You don’t care about archival permanence, so the wash steps don’t matter.
@@tnp651 Thank you Tom!
Hi Tom ))) Great video, and yes it seem very complicated. But okay, it seems like that I need to build this curve because each printer is different? And if you change printers then you have to make a new curve - is that right? Thank you for the video!
You'll at least have to try the old curve with the new printer, then adjust as necessary. If my technique seems complicated, the main takeaway is that your test print will tell you how to adjust the curve. You mainly need to know what will give a textured white and a textured black (the limits of your ability to show detail).
@@tnp651 Thank you Tom! )))
This video is awesome and I'm studying it carefully.
There is one question that comes to my mind, about the transparency film: considering that a good digital negative is long-lasting, and it might be worth a little investment, is it worth to consider buying the Pictorico Pro Ultra Trans Film 184gsm, instead of the "regular" Pictorico Pro OHP Transparency Film 174gsm? Thank you very much!
Hi Gianandrea, I don’t see any advantage to the Ultra film. The manufacturer says “This "Ultra" version differs from standard "Pro Premium" transparency sheets in its excellent compatibility with Epson UltraChrome Photo Black K3 ink, high UV density, and higher capacity for ink absorption.” If you are getting adequate ink density from the less expensive version, there’s no need to change.
@@tnp651 thank you for your kind advice!
Thanks for the great video
Great video. Can someone help clarify something for me? I see you mention the Bostick and Sullivan video which goes over creating a digital negative as well as the printing settings for the negative. Does this chart system replace the digital negative portion of the bostick and sullivan video? It seems like it is just a more refined process but if I am using their chemistry and curves wouldn't I just need to dial in my exposure times and it should be good to go? Thanks in advance.
To be honest, I haven’t tried B&S’s pre-made curve but there are too many variables that change your image. It’d be easy to try B&S’s curve and see what you get. In any case, assess and change as I showed in the video.
@@tnp651 will do. I’m just waiting on a printer to print my negative.
This is marvelous, Tom. I'm just getting started with platinum/palladium and you saved me many days of frustration. Like you, I'm a numbers guy and like this measurement-based approach. However, there's one thing I don't understand. In your second step you scan the first image (non0ChartThrob) image, then bring it up side-by-side with the digital original. You then apply the curve to that original and tweak the curve to match the imperfect first sample print. I don't get it. If the sample print is too dark in the midtones as compared to the original, for example, doesn't this further darken those midtones for successive prints? I'm sure there some logic or arithmetic I'm just missing here. Thanks!
You can see the dull-looking print (1B) at 10:00. It's not too dark. I concluded I was trying to hold detail in the dark quarter-tones and that was making the contrast too low. Instead of making the dark spot on the left cabbage an almost-black, I moved that density to the center-back area and let the left spot go true black. The midtones become darker but that gives a pleasing contrast to the brightest highlights, which begin to stand out. If you stop the video precisely at 10:12 you'll see 1B and 1C superimposed. Besides darkening the lows, I also pulled the lightest curve point up a bit. Remember that the mids and highs are very sensitive to changes in the curve. For 1D I pulled the highs up even a bit farther (see 10:32). I hope this helps.
@@tnp651 Thanks!
Hola, muy interesante la información, permitame hacerle una pregunta ¿Cuál seria el medio para imprimir el negativo digital si quiero realizar una impresión en planino paladio?
No imprimo paladio, pero aquí hay un vídeo que podría ayudar. th-cam.com/video/EexJ9Ollfys/w-d-xo.html
hello tom,
I appreciate your videos, very instructive;
I would like to have a clarification: do you apply the curve before or after the inversion in negative?
the results are totally different, how do you do it?
Best regards,
Gilbert
I apply my curves before inversion. Bostick & Sullivan recommends the opposite (and of course the curve would look totally different) but I don’t know why. Applying to the positive image makes it more intuitive to change the curve if needed (“the highlights are too light, so I’ll darken them” for instance).
Hi Tom, I followed the instruction for the chart throb. After I opened it in PS, Do I print the Chart Throb straight through in PS, or I have to use B&S method in order to create a print of Chart Throb for each alternative printing technique?
Use the B&S method for your test neg and all negs.
Hi Tom!!! great video!!! any tips for carbon printing??? thanks!!!
Sorry, Paulo, I’ve never tried carbon
Please upload a digital negative process for platinum palladium printing. Thank you
2:00 What's wrong with laser printers?
Laser printers create an image made of noticeable dots or lines. Inkjets put down a spray of microscopic droplets.
Thank You! I am taking an effort to conquer this process.
If I don’t have a scanner, can I replace it with taking a photo?
ChartThrob expects a scan but it’s worth substituting a picture. You’ll find out soon enough if it works. Alternatively, have a friend scan it for you. You only need the scanner one time.
Tom Nelson thank You so much!
Hello.
Can I use "HP LaserJet Pro P1102" for making digital negative? Answer and help me please.
Thanks a lot.
I don’t know. You should make a test to see if the print is dark enough to print a white, and does not have visible lines or dots.
Would you please advise which printer is good for digital negative?
Most alt process printers I know use Epson SureColor printers. I have an Epson P600.
@@tnp651 Thank you for the great video! And reply
Can I print it on a laser printer? I heard there are transparency films that work with laser printers
Try it and see, then report back. I haven't heard of anyone doing it.
how to i do the timing with a NuArc 26-1k? it uses units instead on min.
Time it to see how many units are in a minute. Say there are 20 units in a minute. I’m not familiar with the NuArc but I’d guess you’ll need something between 3 and 7 minutes. That’s 60-140 units in this hypothetical example. Give your test strip 60 units, then cover part of it. Then give a series of exposures at 10 units, covering more of the strip each time.
Did you ever figure it out. I have a NuArc 3140 and will probably run into the same issue here shortly. Thanks
Thank you
Can you make a digital negative to print in an enlarger... for example can I make a 4x4 inch negative from a negative I retoucher in LR....
Enlarging a digital negative is not advisable. You'll be enlarging the printer dots that make up the image. You might make it work if you print the neg at the highest resolution your printer can make, and don't make a very big enlargement. Why not just make a contact print though?
@@tnp651 I can just do that yes. I thought I would just have a master neg that can do all sizes by putting in an enlarger. Was just a though. Any current printer recommendations for up to 16/20
Thanks BTW‼️
@@davidventura1424 Most alt printers use Epsons. The XP-700 prints 13" wide and the XP-900 prints 17"wide. The XP-900 is 50% more expensive for those few extra inches!
TH-cam won't let me embed a link. Bostick & Sullivan's tutorial for printing on film is at tinyurl.com/v43m48e.
Thanks ))
I have tried and tried again to get ChartThrob.jsx installed into Photoshop 2020 on my Mac without success. Any ideas as to why this is?
I finally got it loaded but I had to download it on a PC and transfer the file on a thumb drive.
Yes, I just realized the problem. The site downloads a file called ChartThrob.jsx.txt. You need to remove the "(dot) txt" to use it as a script. Let me know if you still have trouble.
Thanks for getting back to me. That’s the first thing I tried to no avail. I must have tried 20 times in different ways but it still wouldn’t install. In the end I downloaded the file on my old PC and it installed straight away in PS 2020. I then copied the file from the PC to a thumb drive and transferred it to the Mac. I dragged the file into the appropriate folder and it works. Removing the .txt doesn’t work as the Mac still sees it as a text file.
Failing to install Chartthrob on a M1 Mac running Big Sur with Ps 2021 or a PC running Windows 10 and PsCS6 but neither open the script. Gives an error 23 at line 134. Have made sure to use the 662kb script file. Any suggestions?
Here's a link to ChartThrob: tinyurl.com/y4mgmkzj
Great demo. Thanks. Unfortunately 99% of prints made this way are mediocre if that.
Why not just print the digital photograph?
For me, it’s the excitement of learning and exploring an old-time technique. Getting back in the darkroom is nostalgic for me, but I don’t want to lose the image control that digital provides. A hybrid process is the perfect compromise.
ink jet prints sit on top of the paper. these process are kinda burned into the paper chemically and the texture of the paper stands out. It also lasts way longer like those old photos that grandma used to have sitting in her house. That was the size of the negative so that was the size they printed at. Now we use digital to create bigger negatives to do the same printing but at a more modern and desirable size.