to make collodion plates on an inkjet

[mstevensphoto]

Hi All,
   I recently re-watched the youtoube vid of the guy turning in his life savings and converting a truck to a camera to make Collodion prints and for at least the 9,000th time said to myself "man I love that effect". Have any of you ever played with getting something that looks as close to an original collodian from your large format inkjet? If so, can you share substrate/ink/technique/finish thoughts? It seems like simply printing on aluminum doesn't cut it here. what do you think?
Mark

[John Nollendorfs]

Mark:
Collodion plates are a process for capturing a negative image, not for making prints. In their time, collodion negatives were printed on silver albumen prepared papers.

There was a process called "tintype" using a black painted tin substrate, and the Ambrotype, that used glass as a substrate, using the collodion for one of a kind images. Have you seen any of these examples, or just watched the Youtube video?

It  would be good if you did some research on the processes involved and what "look" you are interested in, before asking if it can be done on an inkjet.

[mstevensphoto]

John, although tintypes are from a collodian process, collodian plates are not always a negative, they are the end result. one coats aluminum or many other materials to make the exposure. I've seen many variants in person, own a couple books on wet plate printing and have spent time in the darkroom trying not to blow up. Wet plates done on metal in my mind bare very little if any resemblance to inkjet prints made on metal.

[bill t.]

I recall attending a talk on how to simulate classic looks with digital prints.  I wish I could remember the guy's name!

Here's what I remember, kinda...

1. Look carefully at the lighting conditions used for original images.  Most old processes were constrained by working best in very bright light, and in light of a particular contrast ratio and direction in relation to the subject.  Do your shooting in those conditions.

2. Digitize several original images.  Look at the curves get a feel for the tonal distribution of overall image.  For similar images try to reproduce the same density distribution.

3. Now digitize several small, monotonic sections of an original print, particularly places that characterize the highlight, midrange, and dark ranges of the image.  Study the microcontrast.  Learn how to create masks to target those specific tonal ranges so you can adjust the microcontrast in your images with targeted curves.  Tony Kuiper's luminance masks come to mind here.  One of the biggest differences between modern and classic processes is in the overall tonality and microcontrast.  Tonal subtlety took a big hit starting in the grainy, grungy 60's, and we are only just starting to recover from those ugly days.

And of course shoot images typical of those shot during the processes heyday, or which at least quote some aspects of the tradition.

And look carefully at the color and toning of originals.  Don't forget the surface characteristics.  And various processes had recurring defects particularly around the edges, and characteristic small localized defects on the surface.  Figure out how to create those.

And most classic prints had rather thick emulsions with a certain amount of relief and sometimes texture that varied with image density.  Dunno what to do about that, but thick "sensuous surface" barytas and art papers might be appropriate.

Piece o'cake.