View Camera Australia: Online exhibition September 2022
View Camera Australia’s fifth online exhibition features the work of: Stuart Clook, Megan Ferguson, Janet Naismith, Ray Goulter, Keith Mallett, Daisy Noyes, Charles Millen, Andy Cross, Wendy Currie, Lee Lira, Alex Bond, Morganna Magee, Shane Booth, Greg Soltys, Ruth Maddison, Mick Lord, Bianca Conwell, Ellie Young, Mark Darragh, Zo Damage, Mat Hughes, Judy Hudson, Peter de Graaff, Keira Hudson, Murray White, Rory Bliss, Gary Chapman, Jong Lee, Keiko Goto and Gary Sauer-Thompson.
Main photograph above: Kotukutuku fuchsia, 2021. 20 x 25cm platinum print on vellum over silver leaf. Digital internegative from a 4×5 film negative. Stuart Clook
Megan Ferguson
Adelaide Botanic Gardens. 2022. Scan of 4×5 negative.
Janet Naismith
Still Life. 20 x 25 cm hand painted photograph. Platinum palladium on water colour paper allows the photographer to use water colour paints, giving the image a new dimension enhancing the image from ordinary to extraordinary. Folio.
Ray Goulter
Port Milang Railway Museum. Scan of 4×5 infrared negative. Apart from the usual lighter foliage from infrared film, I wanted to achieve good definition in the sky/clouds, thus I opted to add the polarising filter as well as using the R720 filter. There has been some moderate sharpening and contrast adjustment of the digital file and some inconsequential foreground cropped out to give a more pleasing composition.
Keith Mallett
Powlett River bend. Powlett River, Bass Coast, Victoria. 6x6cm pinhole negative scan. The Photograph Considered.
Daisy Noyes
Sandy recovering from stroke, double exposure. Scan of 6×7 negative. Website. Instagram. Folio.
Charles Millen
Ice Patterns I – Dawn Light. From the series: Study of Ben Lomond in Tasmania. Scan of 4×5 transparency. The Photograph Considered.
Mill Creek Falls, Laughlintown, Pennsylvania. 2022. Scan of 4×5 transparency.
Ruth Maddison
Holdfast (algae) 1, 2022. Lumen prints made on 6 sheets of gelatin silver paper. Scanned, digitally combined and enhanced. Instagram.
Mick Lord
Dreamscape: A corridor at night. 30 x 18.8 cm lith print from 6×7 negative.
My wife and I were visiting central Australia. On the second day we arrived at Yulara
This is the corridor outside our motel room.
Bianca Conwell
Coral, 2022. 20 x 25 cm silver gelatin contact print from wet plate glass negative. Website. Instagram. Folio.
West Island, Fleurieu Peninsula, 2022. Scan of 4×5 negative. Ngarrindjeri country. From the Fleurieuscapes project. This project is an exploration of the Southern Fleurieu Peninsula in South Australia. Website. Instagram. Facebook. The Photograph Considered.
Stuart Clook
Totara, 2021. 25 x 20 cm platinum print on vellum over 24ct gold leaf print. Digital internegative from 4×5 film negative. Website. Instagram. The Photograph Considered.
View Camera Australia’s previous online exhibitions can be seen here.
Nelson Trees - Silver gelatin print I am a photographer/educator…
There are 8 comments for this article
Ray Goulter
at 4:17 am
I was quite taken by Mat Hughes’ cyanotype ‘The Long Paddock’. Mat: I would like more information on how that print was made, such as the light source, time of exposure, base material etc. I recently got some cyanotype chemicals and would like to get more information on producing 8″ x 10″ enlargements (or larger) from infra-red 4″ x 5″ negatives. My main concern is burning out enlarger globes, as a cyanotype would need extended exposure using this light source?
I was probably a little economical with my wording in the description. This has now been updated to include the word ‘internegative’.
It is with the use of an internegative that an image can be enlarged, as in this case from 4’x5′ to 38x30cm. No, it is not possible to use a traditional darkroom enlarger. The most common method of UV exposure for cyanotypes is either to the sun or for a controlled exposure, with a UV lightbox which are usually home made.
The internegative or digital negative can be made in various ways suffice to say that the negative is digitized and enlarged with a computer before being printed out at the same size that you require the final print to be. I have recently changed my workflow so that I can print larger and have found wet scanning to be great for my purposes. I currently print digital negatives on a product from the US called Fixxons. Other more premium brands include Permajet & Pictorico.
If you pursue this most enjoyable process you will at some point run up against the dreaded ‘curves’. A curve is a computer formula that is unique to your workflow and your materials that you need to establish and digitally add to your digital negative every time you make a print. This may sound daunting but really isn’t. A good online resource might be Peter Mhar’s Easy Digital Negatives or the short course on Paolo Saccheri’s website, it depends on how deep you want to dive!
A lot of this probably depends on your printer and how much control you are able to exert over it and the inks it uses. With a modest A4 home printer the largest digital negative you could print might be 10`x7` but this is very basic, rough entry level with no ink control. I use a 13′ Epson P600.
The digital negative is contact printed under glass in the UV box. I print on Hahnemuhle 300gsm Platinum Rag, a paper specifically for alt processes, but be careful as there is a similarly named inkjet paper! I mix my own chemicals. Every stage of my workflow is fixed and identical every time I print. This is the benefit of sweating through the ‘curves’, everything is repeatable. My exposure for cyanotype is 6 minutes.
Finally, the image above was toned with fenugreek seed. Search out the excellent book by Annette Golez on toning with botanicals.
Thanks Mat, that gives me something to go on. It does seem an involved process, but that’s how a lot of photography was back in the earlier days. I’ll do some research using the information you provided. As with most of these things, it boils down to getting the experience and making sure notes record sufficient detail to rely on for the next attempt.
Dear Ray,
To make an 8×10 negative suitable for cyanotype you will need to go through the interpositive process first. For that an enlarger is fine. To print the 8×10 using cyanotype you need a UV lightsource. An enlarger lamp doesn’t emit anything light enough UV to be effective.
Andy.
Thanks Andy, good information regarding the internegative and an enlarger’s lack of suitable UV output. I have an old 8×10 ‘cabinet’ (from about the 1940s) with a normal incandescent 10W light source, for printing direct to an 8×10 sheet of normal enlarging paper sandwiched with the 8×10 negative. Once I’ve got the hang of the internegative, I’ll look at changing the light source from an incandescent one to a UV fluorescent and see if that does the trick.
Hi Ray,
Most Alt processes are only sensitive to the UV A wavelengths. Their sensitivity to B and C are a lot less. So when it comes to choosing a UV light source it would be best to choose one that is classified as an actinic A discharge lamp. They don’t emit much visible light most of the energy goes into producing UV. It will greatly reduce exposure times. The Palladio Co used to be a supplier but went out of business long ago. I am sure there would be other suppliers for these lamps now.
What a stunningly diverse exhibition. Many thanks to David Tatnall for all his energy and work in supporting and encouraging this approach to the photographic.
I was quite taken by Mat Hughes’ cyanotype ‘The Long Paddock’. Mat: I would like more information on how that print was made, such as the light source, time of exposure, base material etc. I recently got some cyanotype chemicals and would like to get more information on producing 8″ x 10″ enlargements (or larger) from infra-red 4″ x 5″ negatives. My main concern is burning out enlarger globes, as a cyanotype would need extended exposure using this light source?
Howdy Ray.
I was probably a little economical with my wording in the description. This has now been updated to include the word ‘internegative’.
It is with the use of an internegative that an image can be enlarged, as in this case from 4’x5′ to 38x30cm. No, it is not possible to use a traditional darkroom enlarger. The most common method of UV exposure for cyanotypes is either to the sun or for a controlled exposure, with a UV lightbox which are usually home made.
The internegative or digital negative can be made in various ways suffice to say that the negative is digitized and enlarged with a computer before being printed out at the same size that you require the final print to be. I have recently changed my workflow so that I can print larger and have found wet scanning to be great for my purposes. I currently print digital negatives on a product from the US called Fixxons. Other more premium brands include Permajet & Pictorico.
If you pursue this most enjoyable process you will at some point run up against the dreaded ‘curves’. A curve is a computer formula that is unique to your workflow and your materials that you need to establish and digitally add to your digital negative every time you make a print. This may sound daunting but really isn’t. A good online resource might be Peter Mhar’s Easy Digital Negatives or the short course on Paolo Saccheri’s website, it depends on how deep you want to dive!
A lot of this probably depends on your printer and how much control you are able to exert over it and the inks it uses. With a modest A4 home printer the largest digital negative you could print might be 10`x7` but this is very basic, rough entry level with no ink control. I use a 13′ Epson P600.
The digital negative is contact printed under glass in the UV box. I print on Hahnemuhle 300gsm Platinum Rag, a paper specifically for alt processes, but be careful as there is a similarly named inkjet paper! I mix my own chemicals. Every stage of my workflow is fixed and identical every time I print. This is the benefit of sweating through the ‘curves’, everything is repeatable. My exposure for cyanotype is 6 minutes.
Finally, the image above was toned with fenugreek seed. Search out the excellent book by Annette Golez on toning with botanicals.
Best regards
Mat
Thanks Mat, that gives me something to go on. It does seem an involved process, but that’s how a lot of photography was back in the earlier days. I’ll do some research using the information you provided. As with most of these things, it boils down to getting the experience and making sure notes record sufficient detail to rely on for the next attempt.
Dear Ray,
To make an 8×10 negative suitable for cyanotype you will need to go through the interpositive process first. For that an enlarger is fine. To print the 8×10 using cyanotype you need a UV lightsource. An enlarger lamp doesn’t emit anything light enough UV to be effective.
Andy.
Thanks Andy, good information regarding the internegative and an enlarger’s lack of suitable UV output. I have an old 8×10 ‘cabinet’ (from about the 1940s) with a normal incandescent 10W light source, for printing direct to an 8×10 sheet of normal enlarging paper sandwiched with the 8×10 negative. Once I’ve got the hang of the internegative, I’ll look at changing the light source from an incandescent one to a UV fluorescent and see if that does the trick.
Hi Ray,
Most Alt processes are only sensitive to the UV A wavelengths. Their sensitivity to B and C are a lot less. So when it comes to choosing a UV light source it would be best to choose one that is classified as an actinic A discharge lamp. They don’t emit much visible light most of the energy goes into producing UV. It will greatly reduce exposure times. The Palladio Co used to be a supplier but went out of business long ago. I am sure there would be other suppliers for these lamps now.
What a stunningly diverse exhibition. Many thanks to David Tatnall for all his energy and work in supporting and encouraging this approach to the photographic.
Thanks very much Gary.