Wet Plate Article and Photos

<p>This appeared in a local paper. I can't imagine why anyone would put themselves through all this? Although the results are great.</p>

<p>http://abouttown.us/index.php/dutchess-columbia-articles/food-and-wine/1222-Francesco-Mastalias-Organic-Farmers</p>

<p>Because the results are great. I've been moving for some time now back towards some of the older processes and methods. While I doubt I'll go quite this far I am interested in doing a more classic type of B&W portraiture outside of the studio setting. Looking at those images gives me a clearer idea of what I am working toward. The comment in the article about life's rythms hit quite close to home as did the photographers dissatisfaction with digital.</p>

<p>Rick H.</p>

<p>In my thinking just shooting LF in today's digital world is enough? Shooting like Matthew Brady seems nuts? I'd shoot 8x10 and make contact print portraits.</p>

<p>Some recent full plate and half plate size LF cameras out of China and perhaps elsewhere also accept film (Ilford will cut it specially for those sizes) and full plate, in between 5 x 7 and 8 x 10 can also make some nice size contact prints, or you can print the negative via an 8 x 10 enlarger. Personally, I think MF film is easier to use and maintain some spontaneity of the subject and can give very good results. There is of course a different pleasure in using old processes with their particular look but I wonder if sometimes such approach becomes a mainly technical one rather than concentrating on an artistic or photographic objective.</p>

<p>Thanks for the link, Steve. The wet collodion process appeared about 1860 and was displaced by dry plates in 1880. It was preceded by the daguerreotype and calotype processes which were the two first generation processes which lasted from about 1840 to 1860.<br /> Mathew Brady started using the older daguerreotype before switching to the wet collodion process. The disadvantages of the earlier process were that daguerreotypes were single images, like a polariod, and could not be easily reproduced while the collodion process, like the earlier calotype produced a negative. The daguerreotype chemistry was also pretty toxic involving mercury fumes. By contrast the wet collodion process was realtively benign though it was said a photographer could be identified by their blackened fingers.</p>

<p>If you're wanting a period looking photo, wet plate is the way to go. There is a niche for this.</p>

<p>Kent in SD</p>

I love the look of wet plate. I wrote a short blog post on my first experience with it. Hopefully Ok to post here.

 

http://www.luttmannphotography.blogspot.ca/2013_10_01_archive.html

<p>http://studioq.com/<br>

Take a look at the work of Quinn Jacobson. A few videos of his work and wet plate in general on his site. He teaches workshops and produces a lot of work.<br>

Wet plate is an interesting process that is 'hands on' from start to finish. Many who try it are satisfied with most anything as a result. The finer workers push and produce excellent finished images.</p>

<p>

Robb Kendrick video. He shoots for National Geographic. This is on tintype work of his.</p>