Impressionism on Film?

A private theory of mine is that the Impressionist artists got some of their ideas from the emerging technology of photography. My insight, if one could call it that, was spotting dust off of black and white negatives of my brother's to be included in a book I was making of his work. When you work that closely on an image you can see how the image is built up out of different shaped grains of silver of differing density and size. A photo that conveys a clear and focused image of a familiar object is composed of pieces that are nowhere nearly so sharp or definite when examined closely. 

To me this is similar to what the impressionist did with a paint brush. Not interested in marking shapes and shades in sharp well drafted lines they are made with strokes, brushes, or points of color and shade. Anyway, that is my theory, I have no other way to defend it. 

This led me to think that I could make images that were intentionally very grainy. That led me to think I should try landscape photography with my smallest camera. My biggest camera is a 4x5 large format. I thought I should try my Minolta MG 16 camera.  

The Minolta takes 20 photos on 16mm movie film. Each photo is 14x10mm, very tiny. The camera has a 28mm f2.8 lens. There is a built-in meter as well. It is impressive for its size. Actually, it is quite fun to use. 

The Scale of the Endeavor
Negative in yellow
Enlarged Negative in gray
Final print size in blue

When I first got the camera, I bought 100ft of Kodak 7222 Double X black and white movie film. I have a few empty film cartridges and load the film myself. Thís involves coiling 18 1/2 inches into the small cartridge. Doing this the last time in a dark bag I found that it is easy to scratch the emulsion. It is important to wind the film to the proper tightness without pulling the film to make the roll tighter. As a result, though I took a full roll of 20 images few were useable. I also found the guidelines in the viewfinder are quite conservative so I could stand closer to the subject. 

I ended up with this one test image of what I called the Origin Trees which I have printed in other incarnations before. Molly and I went back out, and she had a great deal of fun running about the fields as I tried to get photos of trees. These seemed like natural subjects for this experiment. 

Source image on 16mm film

The film is ISO 200/250 so not terribly grainy except of course the negative is quite small. I put the negative in the enlarger and when I cranked it to its greatest height, I could just manage a 6"x4" (150mmx100mm) image. This wasn't going to have the effect I was after. I then decided I needed a bigger negative, so I made a 4x5 version on some ortho lith film. 

Naturally I first made an interpositive image on the ortho lith film. Lith film is pretty contrasty so I made a test strip and a number of different exposures to get the right amount of grain and tone in the image. When I made the first interpositive I found I had to have the negative and negative carrier scrupulously clean of all dust. Since I was going to magnify the image, any small dust would be a problem.

Interpositive Examples (4x5)

From these I picked a couple and then made a negative. Again, I had to be very careful about cleaning dust. The negative I made as a contact print. To make both the positive and negative I found it very useful to use a 4x5 film holder. In the first case I would load the lith film in the film holder and position it under the enlarger. To help with focus and composition I put a sheet of 4x5 white paper in the film holder to make the image easier to see. I also used the corner of the easel to locate the corner of the film holder. 

Once I had the focus and composition on the film-holder I loaded up the film-holder with the lith film and then made my test strips and images. These I developed in paper developer. Next for the negatives I slid the unexposed lith film into the film-holder then slid the positive film over the top. I removed the negative carrier and stopped the lens down to f22 and used the enlarger as a light source for the contact print in the film holder. I made a number of these as well to get the contrast and density I would like. 

Final negative examples

I picked the best of these which I judged to be one with interesting detail in the tree trunks and the hedge band at the base of the trees. The one I picked is still in the enlarger and sits between the two pictured above in terms of density.

Conventional Prints

From here I planned to make some conventional prints and then to try lith printing some examples. 

I made hard and soft test prints, and this put me in the range of #00 filter at 8 seconds as I wanted some color to the sky and a little fill for the highlights generally. I then chose #5 at 11 seconds to raise the contrast. 

f45 #0 8 sec #5 11 sec

I now can see the results and judge the overall tonal range. I then run a range of different exposures. I start with the view I must burn the top of the print just about 1/3 of the way up where the tone on the trees gradually lightens. First burn with #5 filter for 1 stop (11 seconds)

f45 #00 8 sec #5 11 sec burn top #5 11 sec

This darkens the sky and helps the trees get a more even tonal range. I next try for more contrast. Worried from my test strip that 1/2 stop is too much I opt for 1/4 stop hard filter exposure. 

f45 #00 8 sec-#513 sec #5 burn top 13 sec

Finally, all hard filter. I still get tone in the sky and a grittier appearance.

f45-#5 13 sec burn top #5 13 sec

So where am I on this?  First of all, I have never been an enthusiastic fan of this gritty style, but I should also push my aesthetic boundaries. The next set of images are my lith versions.

Lith

I made four images on Oriental Seagull grade 2 paper. It liths reliably and I have a lot of it so it is always a good starting point. I made the first two prints forgetting the need to burn the upper half of the image. The consequence was the infectious development started in the hedge and couldn't progress evenly up the tree trunks. I did one for 32 seconds exposure at f32 taking an ISO 100 Ev 3.0 reading in the stubble in the foreground. This one gives the classic higher contrast the lith gives for lower exposure times. It also exhibits the need for burning the upper half. 

Oriental Seagull #2 Lith Print
f32 32 sec

The next is a 64 second exposure. It exhibits more tone in the sky and as a consequence slightly lower contrast.  

Oriental Seagull #2 Lith Print
f32 64 sec

Remembering to burn the top section I made 32 and 64 second examples.

Oriental Seagull #2 Lith Print
f32 64 sec burn top 64 sec

This looks better and the infectious development proceeded in a more uniform way in the shadow areas. 

Up until this point I had pulled the print from the developer once I saw the shadows well-developed but not wanting them to run away in the dark hedge band in the lower third. For the next one I decided to let the development run much longer. I stopped once the hedge area began to close up before it became pure black. Surprisingly, the sky darkened a lot, and the burn area became very apparent. It also revealed a lighter portion on the right edge that could bear with a burn to even it up more. 

More importantly is the degree to which the mood has changed, suddenly dark and foreboding.

Oriental Seagull #2 Lith Print
f32 32 sec burn top 32 sec

Toning

The next step on this odyssey is to tone the prints. The liths I think take to toning better. I started by selenium toning the prints in 1+12 for 3 minutes each. This is to keep the blacks unambiguously black. Toning with that dilution and duration should leave the mid-tones untoned and subject to toning. I start with iron blue toning. Iron toning can be tricky to get a good look. 

I started with the Moersch MT7 kit and mixed 10+10+0+5+800 ml. I opted to leave out the optional stabilizer as it can affect the color. I also reduced the acid as I wanted a less vivid blue color. One challenge with iron toning is the blues can get quite exotic and to me not very appealing. This can be helped with cobalt toning or the use of lead acetate. I intend to try the Moersch cobalt toning kit but don't have it yet. I can't seem to buy lead acetate here in the UK for some reason. 

Oriental Seagull #2 Lith Print f32 64 sec
Selenium 1+12 3 minutes
Iron blue toning
Ammonia Bath
Photoshop borders

This turned out painterly or hand colored. I immersed the print in toner up to the horizon line for about 40 seconds. This kept the stubble in the warmer tone of the lith developed section. The warm lith tones shown through nicely in the sky highlights and I enhanced this with an ammonia bath of 2ml 10% ammonia in 1L of water. Alkali has the effect of bleaching away the iron tone. This makes it a way to manipulate the tone. In fact, it is possible to remove the iron completely with such a bath. With this ammonia bath I was able to balance the warm and blue tones more carefully in the highlights. The blue toing bath is very opaque, so the density of blue is difficult to judge. 

The next print I treated in a similar way; the print had less exposure, so the sky had less density. This seemed to lead to a more lurid blue color and less of the warm tones coming through. The tones have some interesting patterns that I do not know the origins of.  

 

Oriental Seagull #2 Lith Print f32 32 sec
Selenium 1+12 3 minutes
Iron blue toning
Ammonia Bath
Photoshop borders

Toning, like lith, is incredibly difficult to make consistent. The first of these two is my favorite. 

Next, I tried sepia toning on darkest lith print. I started by bleaching in Fish and Chips bleach. I bleached it back a ways but not completely. I then soaked it in sepia/sulfur toner (1+100) for a few minutes. I then washed it completely and then redeveloped in lith developer for 20 minutes to make sure any undeveloped bleached silver would be completely developed but retaining a warmer tone.  

Oriental Seagull #2 Lith Print
f32 32 sec burn top 32 sec
Fish and Chips Bleach
Sepia tone
Redevelop in old EasyLith