information on equipment to make prints from glass plate negs.

[scott_miller8]

Does anyone know what kind of equipment is needed to make prints from

glass negatives? There is a remarkable collection of several thousand

negatives at a museum in central Minnesota and they would like to

make prints from the negatives for their collection and for public

use. They had a fellow doing it, but he left them in the lurch about

4 years ago and sold all his equipment. There is still about 75% of

the collection to print, I believe. I'm told that it takes special

equipment to print from these old plates. Any comments are welcome.

By the way, I am not a photographer, but want to help this museum out

with leads or information. Thanks all.

 

Scott Miller

[dk_thompson]

Hey, I'm sure some will tell you that it doesn't take much more than a simple lightsource & the means to develop printing (or contact-speed) paper...but fwiw, I'm a staff photographer in a state-run history museum and have worked on similar projects. If I were you, I'd recommend contacting either the state archives or a similar institution for advice, because old plates can be very fragile and difficult to handle & store as well as difficult to reproduce properly on modern printing materials.

 

Here are a couple of links to try:

 

http://www.mnhs.org/

 

http://www.mnhs.org/preserve/conservation/photographs.html

 

good luck, hope this helps. Opinions expressed in this message may not represent the policy of my agency.

[ken_burns1]

A local collector has a number of glass plates in their collection. I have printed a number of them, by both contact printing and enlarging. Great care must be take to prevent damage from handling and from excess heat from light sources. I used a Beseler enlarger with a Dichro 45S color head for both the contact prints and enlargements. Additional filtration was added to the enlarger light system to remove both UV and IR.

 

The contact printing was rather easy to do. Two problems that needed solving were 1)how to insure firm contact between the glass plate and paper and 2) how to prevent light leakage creating a flare effect around around the edges. Both problems were solved by making a two-layer masking device using black gator board. The two-piece mask was made about twice the size of the 1/4 plates I was printing(all the plates were 1/4 plate, so that simplified it somewhat.) The bottom piece was cut out to fit nicely around the perimeter of the plate. The top piece was cut out to overlap the glass plate just enough to give me the ability to hold the glass plate down firmly with downward pressure on the edges of the gator board mask. The opening in this layer was cut with bevelled edges. The mask itself flexed enough to prevent any chances of breaking the glass plate from excess pressure. I had to shim up the mask a little with black graphic arts masking tape to get it to work right.

 

Enlarging required a little more effort, but wasn't really that hard to do. I made a three-layer plate holder out of the same black gator board. The top and bottom layers overlapped the plate slightly while the middle layer was cut slightly larger than the plate. The openings in the top and bottom layers were cut with bevelled edges using my mat cutter. This "negative carrier" suspended the glass plate in the enlarger without any excessive pressure. Like I said earlier, even though my enlarger already has heat absorbing glass and UV filtration built in, additional filtration for both UV/IR was added(I still use this filtration to help prevent "negative popping" with conventional films.

 

Now, the print exposure and contrast control are really what proved to be a major challenge. I found very quickly that the images on the plates were very high in contrast. Normally, a low contrast grade of paper will solve that problem, but not in this case. Apparently, the contrast characteristics (characteristic curves) of the old plates do not match the characteristics of today's printing papers. Getting proper detail in the highlights, midtones, and shadow areas was quite difficult. I ended up using a bit of contrast manipulation with variable contrast papers to get acceptable but far from perfect finished prints.

 

I'm sure there are other techniques that would work. But, I only had the opportunity to work with this type material the one time. If I had more time to experiment with printing-out papers or with other media like platinum I probably could have been more successful.

[dk_thompson]

btw--if you do decide to print them (or find someone with enough experience as Ken has suggested in his post above)--whether the plate matches the types of print papers now will depend on it's age. There are wet-plates and dry-plates. Dry plates will be more "modern"--than the hand-coated wet-plates which could date well back into the mid/late 1800s. There are a couple of ways to do this--one would be to use a graded fiber-based contact paper like Kodak's Azo -- the last of the breed still in production--and to make the prints by contact. All you need would be a simple darkroom setup, and the lightsource can be as simple as a switched lightbulb overhead. You can adjust the exposure across the image area by masks or by holding back areas with tissue or matte acetate etc, and you add density in a similar way. You can adjust the contrast a bit through paper grade (there aren't many grades available now) or through developers. The size of the print just depends on the size of the plate. If you tone this paper in a sulfide toner or selenium, and process it well, it should be considered an archival print if stored & handled right.

 

Another way to do it by printing would be to use a "printing out paper"--i.e. a POP paper which uses light to develop the image as opposed to chemistry (develop out paper--DOP--an enlarging paper) This might be a better for older plates in that they were most likely shot to print out on this type of material (or similar) to begin with. There's only one commercially made paper available--and it comes in both RC (plastic based for ease of use) and fiber-based (which should have a longer lifespan, but both need to be toned for longevity).

 

Here's a link to the company that carries this paper. It's called Centennial. FWIW, this is the Chicago Albumen Works, who I believe is the vendor that duplicates glass plates and older negs for the National Archives among others:

 

http://www.albumenworks.com/

 

 

I'm working on a similar project now--only 900 plates ranging in size from 6x8 to 8x10, from the 1880s through early 20s. The later ones are less contrasty and look as though they could print at about a grade 2 (would be a normal contrast) and most have long tonal scales . There are earlier plates that have much greater densities and contrasts though--and these would be tough on alot of current type papers. My workflow is to shoot 4x5 interpositives and make duplicate contact negs to work from--which would be using an enlarger & modern materials. In between, I'm using scans for rough access--off the interpositives. The problem with making prints off the originals is that you have to go back to them every time you need a new print. It's best in an archive type situation to have some sort of plan in place where the originals can be stored safely away and you gain access to whatever they are through duplicates or scans or whatever. You can always go back to them if somethig happens to the dupes, but the less you use the originals, the longer they'll last.

 

Good luck all the same & my opinions only/not my employers.

[loren_sattler]

I know of two libraries that have large old photo collections, the Toledo Lucas County Public Library in Toledo, Ohio and the Walter Reuther Library at the Wayne State University in Detroit. I believe these archives are scanned and then printed. You can contact either one for information. I think that the Toledo Library has pictures on the net. The quality is excellent. You can look at their site or contact them here: http://www.library.toledo.oh.us/

[sue_deva]

I didn't quite understand whether or not it's a requirement that these images be produced via traditional silver process methods.

 

A friend of mine had a large collection of glass plate negatives (and some slides) that were shot by her grandparents. She made a number of beautiful prints simply by scanning the plates on a flatbed with a transparency adapter and then making (non-archival) inkjet prints. These could have just as easily been given to a lab that makes good digital prints.

 

If money and manpower were no object, I would probably print these using regular B&W processing. However, as there are no photographers involved in this project right now, it might be easier for everyone if some intern were assigned to scan the plates (up to 4x5 size) on a decent consumer scanner (an Epson Perfection 2450, for example), burn the files to CD, and give them to a lab. If the intern is familiar with Photoshop, hey, even better. The museum could even advertise for a high school or college student with a reasonable amount of experience in the relevant areas. The finished digital images could be sent to a good pro lab (Duggal in NYC, to name one of the most expensive/best) for printing.

 

The digital route just sounds less complicated than finding someone to do the whole thing via silver process, but of course silver prints and glass plate negatives were actually contemporaneous technologies, whereas LightJet prints and glass plate negatives certainly are not.

 

A final, left-field suggestion. Several very good, very old black-and-white labs in India still have all of their old negatives (including glass plates) and all of their old equipment. Their printers are extremely skilled and the prints are very, very cheap. (An 8x10 B&W enlargement on RC paper costs about $1; fiber is a little more costly.) Mahatta in Delhi (91-11-2341-4139) and GK Vale in Bangalore (91-80-558-9429) are two examples of such places. The museum might want to get in touch with one of these labs, describe what they have and what they need, and get a price quote. Perhaps they could send five or ten plates via registered mail and get a small sample of work done. This final option would be �true� to the medium and would also be inexpensive.

[scott_miller8]

Thanks for all the answers! I appreciate all the information. I should have said that the plates were made from 1902 to 1954 and yes, the man used glass plates to the end! I think they are all dry plates. I have seen scans made from the negatives that were made for me and they are not acceptable. Even in the best ones you can see some scan lines and often the light areas are overexposed. I suppose there are better scanners out there than what the museum has. For those that are interested the museum is in Cokato Minnesota and there is a website: http://www.cokato.mn.us/cmhs/index.html. A few of the pictures are posted there. The studio is part of the museum and is called the Gust Akerlund Studio. I'm sure a lot of photographers would enjoy this place, since it has been preserved, and the studio is still used on occasion for shooting (with outside photographers). I'll pass the information on to the guy in charge over there. He's very interested in getting the rest of the plates printed somehow so people can enjoy looking at the images and use them.

[dk_thompson]

Scott- here's another link to a digitization project the system I work for is involved in, there are some technical documents & alot of links on here to other similar projects:

 

http://www.ncecho.org/

 

The NEDCC is an organization that does alot of photo conservation work & education, they put out a report on setting up digitization projects a few years ago--we have a hardcopy version of this, but most of it is online in addition to an online preservation course:

 

Preservation 101 (check chapter 7 for photos)--

 

http://www.nedcc.org/p101cs/p101wel.htm

 

http://www.nedcc.org/digital/dighome.htm

 

If the museum decides to scan these--it would help to have a workflow in place. My opinion is split on this, in that digital won't capture the whole tonal range of the plates most likely--and the digital files could be problematic as far as storage for the longterm. Film, specifically polyester based b&w sheet film is much more stable & could be worked into an existing negative archive. At the least, they could make contact prints & shoot copy negs or use scans of these to reproduce. The project I'm involved with now is flip-flopping between making contacts & copy negs and making 4x5 interpositive copies and dupe negs and/or scanning the interpositives much like a transparency and doing the reproduction from them. I've found, to my surprise, I'm able to do more contrast adjustments this way, than by contacting the plates. The film, whether a positive or negative will always be the longterm record & the originals will be safely stored. So, it just depends on what sort of way your museum decides it can handle reproducing them for patrons.

 

Where I work--we don't sell inkjets to patrons. But we do have a full b&w wetlab & do some color work (E6) as well. If an image is digital to begin with, we send the files out to a lab that uses either a Frontier printer or a Lightjet depending on the size & use of the image. It should be fairly easy for most places to output a file onto a Frontier printer now, since there are so many labs going this route. The National Archives, for example--uses contract vendors to provide patron prints--and almost all of these vendors are using scans/digital capture and Frontier prints now. Other museums, are using dye sub prints and Fuji Pictro prints in place of traditional b&w RC prints now.

 

So--from my perspective, I see the place I work for shooting film for many years to come, but making tradititonal prints less and using digital output more. The museum you're working with--needs to probably look at what they want to offer their patrons in an affordable way as a non-profit, but they also need to think about doing it in such a way that they archive the originals and if they scan, shoot copy negs whatever--they *do it right the first time*, so they won't have to keep going back. It's for this reason, that I would suggest not using high school students or unskilled volunteers. It would be best to have a skilled printer or photographer do this work, because they can read the negative and will be able to know how it should look as a positive.

 

Opinions expressed in this message may not represent the policy of my agency.

[takermaker]

hi guys i really enjoyed everyones contribution on prints from glass plates for the gentleman-my hobby is making the old time silver gelatino emulsions and reading the answers to the different techniques is very interesting-i cut and make my own glass plates but find 1/8 inch thick plastic works better in a vacumm frame -when using thin glass plates for contacting in a vacumm frame i have to use thick 1/4 inch glass plate under the paper on on top of the thin glass plate negative so the thin glass wont crack-It works great for contacting on coated canves too. Anyway this is what i have encountered with glass plate negatives

[richard_kendall]

Hi, I work at a museum in Australia. Iam currently working on a Glass neg digitizing project. with negs numbering in the 100 of thousands we have done much research into producing a system which allows us to produce high resolution digital files at fast copy rate.

We found it most productive to shoot with a digital camera, Medium format (phase One). The plates are placed on a copy-table with a white perspects base with a cut-out mount. Two studio flash heads below create a lightbox.

the camera is mounted to stand above the table, it' then connected to computer via fire-wire and files are then processed live with Capture One software. we tend to Digitise and process around 400 plates a day. files sizes of 42mb.

if you need more info > www.richvisuals.com.au

 

richie