18 TIMES! FASTER THAN CLASSIC CYANOTYPE! "Blue flash 2 step formula"
Вставка
- Опубліковано 8 вер 2024
- Correction the developer is "Potassium ferricyanide"
This is an ultra fast cyanotype formula inspired from a 2 step method here
• Saidane's Rapid Cyanot...
This is an ultra fast 2 step formula I have named "Blue Flash" which is 18! times faster than classic cyanotype. It consists of a sensitizer and developer. The sensitizer is a 20% ferric ammonia oxalate solution and the developer is a 5% Potassium ferricyanide solution acidified to 3-4 PH with sulfamic acid. Ferric ammonia oxalate is already acidic which allows it to work on its own with less than desirable papers, it is also much more absorbent than classic cyanotype for coating although you must be sure not to over saturate the paper otherwise green crystals will form while drying which will ruin the picture. This is not intended to be a replacement for classic cyanotype but a tool to use, its faster exposure will hopefully work well for UV enlargements as well as "in camera" cyanotypes for future videos.
I have successfully implemented it according to the idea in your video, which is a very good solution. grateful. Also, I used citric acid instead of strong acid. The exposure time is not as fast, but the effect is still great. My exposure times are around two minutes to two minutes and thirty seconds.
Very glad to hear it worked for you
I just ordered my sulfamic acid and PH test strips. Stay tuned! 😸
Very well done, thanks. However, for now I'll stay with the classic method and undiluted vinegar.
I promise not to bug you with dang fool questions every day. But, I have a simple one.
I have all my chemicals and materials ready to measure and mix. Ferric ammonium oxalate? You betcha!
My question: if I mix a bottle of the solutions, do they need to be used immediately - or do they have a comfortable shelf life?
As always, best wishes from Vermont. ❄️💙❄️
B. Stockwell
No problem at all. Although I do not have an exact estimate, I just tested some I made 7 months ago, and it was fine. It was stored in my basement in a light tight bottle if that helps.
@@matthewbary1 Thank you, Maestro! 😸 I'll let you know how it works out. Stay tuned! Best wishes from extremely rural Vermont. ❄️💙❄️
@@TheStockwell I've made some that I kept in light tight bottles I forgot about 4 years ago tested it out yesterday and still works just needed a bit more exposure time.
Wonderful work! How does the contrast compare to the regular approach?
It would be an idea to test new cyanotype against your new approach on platinum paper. In that way the new cyanotype will look its best.
It is similar to new cyanotype but can be controlled by the amount of sulfamic acid used
@@douwekrooshof881 I will have to try that and show the results. I have tried it on Motval and it looks amazing and have also tried it on inkjet transparency and it worked great which is why I want to test it as a in camera cyanotype negative. I also think it will be very helpful in uv enlargers to help speed the process up.
@@matthewbary1 That sounds very promising!
Promising, indeed! I'd say with these exposure times, you would almost have to start being careful and develop away from any form of daylight to keep your whites white.
Douwe beat me to reproducing this, as I saw on Instagram, but here are my own findings:
Chemicals arrived in the mail yesterday and I spent an evening playing.
First of all: this process is a lot of fun. The pour-over instant-result aspect is fascinating.
I found that applying the sensitive solution (ammonium ferric oxilate) needs to be done incredibly thin, to the point that I got best results when I brushed it dry (carefully) with an old kitchen towel. Anything more than that gives nasty orange/brown staining that I cannot get rid of.
Indeed with the paper I used I got the best results by adding both acids (citric acid to the sensitizer; sulfamic acid to the cyanide developer).
I have just installed a new UV led COB (30W only) in my "douwe-type" enlarger (based off an agfa varioscope enlarger, some 3d printed parts, acrylic fresnel lenses and UV led with cooler) so I cannot really say something about the speed advantage yet as I miss any decent calibration.
Thanks again, @Prussian blues for sharing this method with us.
Thank you for sharing your results, and yes it only takes a little sensitizer to work any over saturation causes staining and crystal formations in the final print. My enlarger is an older Beseler 45MXT 4x5 and although it works great for silver gelatin prints for the UV side it works at optimum with a 100 watt 380 nm led using a 4x5 negative, now I realize that in general yes this should be optimum as it is a bright light with a large negative allowing for the most light transfer however on medium format and especially 35mm it is not even close and it seems like the projectors I have modified work better with only 10 watt leds, I suspect it has something to do with the condenser optics but have not had time to confirm that. Another thing I just tested the other day is that anything with the Ferric Ammonium Oxalate in the formula makes a great blue print but is absolutely awful for toning, I am guessing it has something to do with the Oxalate reacting to the tannins but there is always a substantial stain that is there no matter how much clearing I do.
I had some problems with staining and was not sure why, thanks for clearing this up.
Sorry one more question, can you see the print while exposing for this process or do you have to do test strips to determine the exposure time?
There is a very faint image that is barely legible, so you will have to do test strips
@@matthewbary1 thank you. Have you tried it in the uv enlarger yet. I got a 10x10 print I am testing right now.
Do you have an Amozon shopping list? I have a few of them in my alt process list but the oxalate search is goving me health "supplements" I have your enlarger parts in a list, just waiting for THE MOVE and getting some darkroom/printing space. Have you tried this with sunlight?
Unfortunately you can only get all of these together from a company that sells alternative photography products but here is a list.
www.adorama.com/pyfao100g.html
www.adorama.com/pypfr30g.html
www.adorama.com/pysfa10g.html
Citric acid can be bought at any major retailer in food canning supplies and you may not require it anyway depending on the paper used. Hope this helps
Do you have any thoughts on how this process would work with a gelatin based emulsion? any issues with developing that you foresee?
It should work just fine I assume you mean as a dry plate? When I get the time I am planning on testing it. If it is something you want to try there are 2 methods that should work based on how to make glass cyanotypes, the first one is to make a gelatin emulsion with the sensitizer mixed into it, this can be complicated as you have to be careful about temperatures and also have to do everything including coating the plates in safe light conditions which is complicated, the other one is to simply "sub" the plate with gelatin let it harden then simple apply the sensitizer shortly before you use it, this method is simpler and does not require allot of fussing around.
@@matthewbary1
Yes, You're assumption is correct & thank you for your response! I've been working with glass plates only difference is that I've been working with Van-Dyke chemistry instead of Cyanotypes. I have run into some long term adhesion issues, which I'm currently attributing to incorrect plate preparation. Could you expand on the issues with the pre-mixed gelatin emulsion? How does working outside of safelight conditions affect the outcome?
@@dyamiandrews3433 When you "sub" a plate with gelatin then apply the emulsion later it adheres better to the plate, since you are coating it with sensitizer later you can see what you are doing much better in a well lit area, you also have the added benefit of using the plates with any type of chemistry you are trying to use rather than one plate for each method. When you are making any kind of emulsion you have to heat it up before coating, this means once heated you have to use it and you cannot re use it once heated which is why I like the ide of a "subed" plate better, you coat your plates and ether harden them with a chemical or simply let them set for several weeks to harden then as you need them brush on your sensitizer and let dry. This method will work for cyanotype as well as Van Dyke and other chemistry.
@@matthewbary1 Thanks for the insight! ill defnitely give it a swing.
So if I understand it right you mix Ferric Ammonium Oxalate (trihydrate) and mix it with water and it becomes light sensitive? And than it is developed with Potassium ferricyanide?
That is correct. I add sulfamic acid to the ferricyanide to make it work faster
@@matthewbary1 Great, I got scared when I received Oxalate in transparent bag😅
@@jakobkatrasnik8684 I have received it in both dark and clear containers. It is sensitive to uv so subtle lighting shouldn't hurt but I would still recommend keeping it in a dark container. I would make a solution coat some paper let it dry then develop it without exposing first, this will tell you it it will fog or if it has already been exposed to to much light.
@@matthewbary1 that is great idea, thanks!
If you are using archival/buffered/acid free paper and only acidifying the surface (by adding acid to the chemistry), won't the image eventually fade as the buffering agents "leak" through to the surface?
Because this is a wet process it really doesn't matter what the ph is prior to processing as long as it has no effect on your chemistry. After all the washing is done the paper will essentially be left at whatever ph water you use while washing
Are you sure is potassium ferrocyanide and not potassium ferricyanide?
Potassium Ferricyanide
Apparently the auto correct was changing it
@@matthewbary1 ok, because I was wondering if this was a possible change, but I don't think so.
May I ask you, there is any specific reason to use Sulfamic Acid in place of Oxalic acid as in Saidane's process? Does the acidification of the Ferricianide that increases the sensibility or is it some property specific to the Sulfamic acid?
The sulfamic acid works better for this process and I am not sure exactly why. You could use other acids just with less color depth
@@matthewbary1 Thanks, i'll gonna try other acid while my sulfamic acid don't arrive. I also gonna attempt to use Ferrocyanide (I have them both in storage) for the sake of it, I have used it before making classic cyanotypes with good results!
@@matthewbary1 Hello, just to report that I tried your process exactly as described, used Canson Aquarelle XL as base paper, and even considering that you said that it is a bad paper, results were amazing, blazing fast your process worked as you said, thank you very much! Gonna try to do some tests to measure speed, i'll report back when i have data!
@@matthewbary1 Also, I tried some variations just for the sake of it, with Oxalic acid and using Ferrocyanide (yes, ferro) that I have lying arround.
Oxalic acid does not give the same color depth as you said.
Ferrocyanide simply wont work, the paper never clear and printing is very slow. Hope this helps to clarify some questions for others
@@Soniccd123 Very glad to hear it worked for you
Where do you order your chemicals from? I can't seem to find everything that is needed.
Everything but the sulfamic acid was bought from ether Adorama or B@H the acid was from ebay but I think you can get all of it from ebay just at a higher cost
@@matthewbary1 what is the issue if no acid is added, just curious.
@Deathcatz it will be pale and lower contrast. You could use other acids such as vinegar possibly
@@matthewbary1 thank you I'll give it a try.
To be clear are you using K ferrocyanide or K ferricyanide?
Ferriccyanide
Great thanks for clarifying. In your video you have written K ferrocyanide, at 1.38 minutes in for example.
@@johnbrewer318 No problem. I had to correct it in the description
Did you try it with citric acid?
Yes but it was to weak to give the nice dramatic blue. The citric acid is to add to the sensitizer if the paper is to alkaline
@@matthewbary1 Oh okay, thank you.
@@jakobkatrasnik8684 no problem 😁