Re: [Leica] A Humbling Experience

[ottmar-x@t-online.de (Keith Bingman)]

Kotsinadelis, Peter (Peter) wrote:

> Glen,
>
> Sometimes the old photos are great. Larger negative yields sharper results.
> Even though a lens may have had lower lines per mm resolving power, the
> larger negative, say 8 x 10, provided far superior results especially as an
> 8x10 contact since there was no enlarging needed.  This is probably one
> reason why medium and larger formats have not died off and are still the
> mainstay for weddings, commercial photography, etc.  Is bigger better?  If
> you need the higher quality and hige enlargement, yes.
>
> There were also different printing papers, and if I remember correctly there
> was some sort of platinum process used that also provide beautiful prints.
> I am sure there are others more knowledgable about this printing process
> than I.  Perhaps they can add to this explanation.

I used to work at the Univ. of Washington, which has a great collection of old
prints, negs and glass plates and was lucky enough to print  a lot of these old
photos from both original and copy negs.

Indeed the old papers have a much longer tonal range than even the best silver
paper availible today. (As I write this I am exposing a platinum print in the
other room, a 35-40 minute exercise.) I doubt the average print from the last
century was done in platinum, more likely it was a Salted Paper or Albumin
Print. These both have a similar tonal range to Platinum, some 8 stops or so
and with a good contact neg can make amazing prints. You can still buy some of
these papers today.

There is a list for these things, the Alt Photo list, concerning Platinum and
Palladium, Salted Paper and any number of other antique processes.
Unfortunately for those of us who love our Leicas they almost all require
contact negs...

Keith Bingman
Riedheim, Germany