Topic: True Sepia Tone (Read 8248 times)

Garnick · « **on:** May 12, 2015, 01:34:13 pm »

I'm sure this topic has been covered here, but I cannot find a thread that deals with the issue. Being an old darkroom worker from the 60s I thought I knew what Sepia toned prints looked like, until I started seeing what has become the popular "Digital" answer to a Sepia tone reproduction. I've seen everything from a deep yellow, orange, red, etc. etc. etc., to something that actually approached what I recall producing in the darkroom. Now I will say that my memory is somewhat fuzzy on this, so my own recollection may not be as accurate as I think it is. One thing I can guarantee is that my memory of a true Sepia tone is much more accurate than most of what I see today from the digital darkroom/lightroom. Having said all of that, I would appreciate any replies on this subject and perhaps some samples of a true Sepia toned print, scanned with a calibrated scanner and proper software. Any and all replies will be greatly appreciated.

Gary

Mark D Segal · « **Reply #1 on:** May 12, 2015, 02:56:24 pm »

Hi Gary - I think it's supposed to be a walnut brown, but brown itself isn't really "a colour" and of course no two walnuts are identical; so much for precision on that one. Out of curiosity I just checked out what Lightroom thinks it is, and What Silver Efex Pro 2 thinks it is - two completely different appearances of course. I think in a case like this the best you can do is tone it to what you think looks good for the image or what your eye's memory tells you it looked like in the darkroom of the film era. I tried to search for an L*a*b* recipe for sepia and none turned up. I did learn, however, in paper by a Mr. Steven Berkowitz, that: <<Sepia Toner gets its name from an artists’ pigment made from the common Cuttlefish that lives in the English Channel, Sepia officinalis>>, so that would be the place to begin unraveling the roots of the colour values. :-) The same text goes on to say: <<The actual tone varies greatly depending on the negative, the brand and type of paper, and how the prints are processed in Fixer, Fixer Remover and Final Wash. The formulae of both the bleach and toner can also be varied to extend the range even further.>> So maybe there is no "formal" colour value for it.

JeanMichel · « **Reply #2 on:** May 12, 2015, 03:22:10 pm »

I never was a fan of sepia toning, I much preferred to simply selenium tone my prints just to intensify the blacks and just edge off some bluishness from the papers i used most (Galerie, then Multigrade Fibre). Kokak sold at least two types: warm sepia and sepia, and as with any toners the strength was controlled by the darkroom worker. Ink-jet 'toning' is a whole new matter, but much more easy to control and reprocuce.
Jean-Michel

Ernst Dinkla · « **Reply #3 on:** May 12, 2015, 03:23:24 pm »

Google Sepia Images and you get the variety visualised. Probably not all sRGB assigned images but nevertheless. I did that too and then went for the color tone in that category that I always associated with "Sepia" and vary closer to that choice. It did become subjective a long time ago and even several layers of sepia ink do not stay on the same hue angle one layer gives. BTW there is less deviation in the Google images for sepia ink, manufacturers have different varieties though. If there has to be a standard.

Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst

http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
December 2014 update, 700+ inkjet media white spectral plots

Paul Roark · « **Reply #4 on:** May 12, 2015, 04:20:54 pm »

I looking into the issue several years ago and found that the "sepia" prints had a wide range. I was printing with MIS's glossy carbon on OBA free Silver Rag (I think - I'm not in my office). There I was getting a Lab B = 14. I decided that was most appropriately called a "light sepia." The darker sepias had a Lab B = 25 (plus or minus), and they also had great variability in the Lab A, from the low single digits (a yellowish sepia) to Lab A = B (a more chocolate brown sepia). Some of the old classics actually has a slight magenta tint. (I found a very large French book on photography that had the most and best examples. It appeared to be state funded, with no expense spared.)

My interest was in the most archival prints, in part, because the printing project was for a museum, but also because that is my bias in inkjet printing anyway. I have sepia prints on display in my home that were made using lots of color inks -- yellow and magenta -- and they have faded very noticeably.

I found that the non-OBA paper looked best, but there are not many of those around that are "glossy" and would accept the MIS glossy carbons and produce the sepia tone. The brightened papers looked odd and incongruous with sepia. The matte papers would only produce a Lab B=8, not really even a light sepia.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

Mark D Segal · « **Reply #5 on:** May 12, 2015, 04:24:48 pm »

Paul - what's the name of that French book you mention?

David Sutton · « **Reply #6 on:** May 12, 2015, 05:43:34 pm »

You could also try dyeing the paper. Either before or after printing. I've heard coffee or tea works well. If before I'd brush it on with cotton wool and let the paper dry then print as usual. I've seen an example that was soaked after the print was made and it looked very good, head and shoulders above trying to tone in Photoshop.
David

Garnick · « **Reply #7 on:** May 12, 2015, 05:58:22 pm »

Quote from: Mark D Segal on May 12, 2015, 02:56:24 pm

Hi Gary - I think it's supposed to be a walnut brown, but brown itself isn't really "a colour" and of course no two walnuts are identical; so much for precision on that one. Out of curiosity I just checked out what Lightroom thinks it is, and What Silver Efex Pro 2 thinks it is - two completely different appearances of course. I think in a case like this the best you can do is tone it to what you think looks good for the image or what your eye's memory tells you it looked like in the darkroom of the film era. I tried to search for an L*a*b* recipe for sepia and none turned up. I did learn, however, in paper by a Mr. Steven Berkowitz, that: <<Sepia Toner gets its name from an artists’ pigment made from the common Cuttlefish that lives in the English Channel, Sepia officinalis>>, so that would be the place to begin unraveling the roots of the colour values. :-) The same text goes on to say: <<The actual tone varies greatly depending on the negative, the brand and type of paper, and how the prints are processed in Fixer, Fixer Remover and Final Wash. The formulae of both the bleach and toner can also be varied to extend the range even further.>> So maybe there is no "formal" colour value for it.

Hi Mark,

Yes, I knew the etymology of the word Sepia. A few years ago I watched a program about ocean life, the most interesting part of which was the segment dealing with the Cuttlefish. It's a real chameleon of ocean life, much like its relative the Octopus. Camouflage is their game and they play it very well. One of the divers in the program used some tricks of his own to get the Cuttlefish to change his/her spots, in a manner of speaking. The variation of appearances is absolutely amazing. At one point they were exhibiting a sort of electrical wave all along their body before completely changing colour and other appearances to match their surroundings. Later the Sepia connection was mentioned as well, which of course peaked my interest immediately. Looks like I'll have to add to my Sepia variations and make a few prints for customers to pick from, since the only consensus on a True Sepia Tone is that there is no consensus.

And by the way, thanks again for replying to my email about film scanning with the museum glass. Much appreciated Mark.

Gary

Mark D Segal · « **Reply #8 on:** May 12, 2015, 06:12:20 pm »

You are welcome Gary. Hope it works well for you.

Mark

luxborealis · « **Reply #9 on:** May 12, 2015, 07:12:28 pm »

I remember printing a series of archival historical negatives for my employer at the time. I think I tried half a dozen different paper and developer combinations which were then sepia toned before I found the combination that had a colour tone that was "acceptably" sepia.

Of course, the beauty now is that once you've chosen the paper you like for the project, you can now try different split toning combinations in, for e.g. Lightroom, until you get the one that is "acceptably" sepia.

Me, I prefer a more neutral brown as opposed to the slightly more yellow sepia.

Mark D Segal · « **Reply #10 on:** May 12, 2015, 07:18:40 pm »

Nice photo and nicely toned Terry, but I am intrigued by this notion of "neutral brown". Here's what Jean Bourges says of "Brown", published in "Color Bytes" (Chromatic Press, NY): "No color has more variations or is harder to match than brown."............"The Browns are a large family....." etc. And "neutral"

?

Ernst Dinkla · « **Reply #11 on:** May 13, 2015, 04:52:17 am »

Quote from: Paul Roark on May 12, 2015, 04:20:54 pm

I found that the non-OBA paper looked best, but there are not many of those around that are "glossy" and would accept the MIS glossy carbons and produce the sepia tone. The brightened papers looked odd and incongruous with sepia. The matte papers would only produce a Lab B=8, not really even a light sepia.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

In the Fiber-Baryta class there are some papers close to a Lab b 4.0 both Alpha Cellulose and Rag. In the RC class proofing papers from Epson and Canon are at the same b value. It would surprise me if they do not cope with the inks you use. Mark McCormick recently continued the Epson Proofing White Semi-Matte testing. The white still at 100%, the test not running long yet but few papers make that score over the same period. Got a new 44" roll this week.

Matte papers do not exceed those numbers either, b 4.0 to 5.0 at most. Non inkjet graphic art papers like the Arches Velin Blanc Natural Grain Marqué 300 gsm hit b 7.2. Does not print bad on my HP Zs, still got a pack from silkscreen art printing.

Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst

http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
December 2014 update, 700+ inkjet media white spectral plots

Paul Roark · « **Reply #12 on:** May 13, 2015, 07:40:11 am »

Mark,

I'm on the road, but I'll get the name of that book in a couple of days.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

Paul Roark · « **Reply #13 on:** May 13, 2015, 07:48:13 am »

I might add that although it is not a "sepia" tone as such, for matte paper, I'm going to use the Stonehenge watercolor paper to achieve the warm tones that many associate with older photos. Stonehenge comes is several shades. The darkest is a "Kraft" paper tone, and it's a bit too much for me. It looks like I've printed on a paper bag. See http://www.legionpaper.com/stonehenge for the various tones. You can download that image and measure the tones with the PS eyedropper. The paper is sold through art stores, like http://www.dickblick.com/products/stonehenge-paper/ .

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

Mark D Segal · « **Reply #14 on:** May 13, 2015, 08:42:48 am »

Quote from: Paul Roark on May 13, 2015, 07:40:11 am

Mark,

I'm on the road, but I'll get the name of that book in a couple of days.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

OK, thanks Paul - looking forward.

framah · « **Reply #15 on:** May 13, 2015, 09:54:58 am »

This has always been one of my least favorite things to try to reproduce on my printer....well, that and brown! I manage to finally get something close after numerous tries.

As I was reading this thread, I thought of something I'll try soon. Go to an antiques store and rummage in their old photo bins for sepia toned prints that you feel are what your mind says is a sepia print and use that as a goal to experiment until you have the numbers down. Then you have a starting point for any other pieces that come in needing to be sepia toned. Scan it and remove the color and then try to get it back. It'll take a few tries and a couple of cups of coffee (or tea) (or scotch!) but then you will know the general direction to head for a good sepia. Then take a look at what the other apps say is sepia and see where you can tweek theirs to match yours.

Anything that might help is good.

luxborealis · « **Reply #16 on:** May 13, 2015, 10:22:02 pm »

Quote from: Mark D Segal on May 12, 2015, 07:18:40 pm

Nice photo and nicely toned Terry, but I am intrigued by this notion of "neutral brown". Here's what Jean Bourges says of "Brown", published in "Color Bytes" (Chromatic Press, NY): "No color has more variations or is harder to match than brown."............"The Browns are a large family....." etc. And "neutral"?

I couldn't figure out a way of describing it as "non-yellowish" as so many sepia tones are. I could have said it's a "cool" brown, but brown, by default, is on the warm side of the colour wheel. So "neutral" seemed to fit.

Mark D Segal · « **Reply #17 on:** May 13, 2015, 11:11:35 pm »

Yup, in a way..... :-)

TylerB · « **Reply #18 on:** May 17, 2015, 05:11:24 pm »

I think it's just subjective taste. Way before inkjet I tried standard sepia toner on a variety of papers, and they were all different. Some were the cool brown and some were more golden. My favorite back then was with Forte, which came out a beautiful gold, perhaps more yellow than some of you are talking about. Other papers resulted in a cold, reddish, barely brown hue. If I recall, some others more obsessive than I said the paper developer made a differences as well.
The relevancy of this is simply that there is no "standard" sepia from traditional days to bring forward into digital printing, I think you make you own sepia...

deanwork · « **Reply #19 on:** May 17, 2015, 06:43:38 pm »

When I first started printing in the mid 70s I used to use the Kodak Sepia toner. I liked it on the Kokak Polylure paper. It was like a bleach and redevelopment process from what I can remember. People I shared the darkroom with said " don't do that in here anymore it smells like dead fish". And it did smell exactly like rotten fish. Maybe there is something to the fish story.

john

Author Topic: True Sepia Tone (Read 8248 times)