Wet Plate Beginner's Questions Thread

[ethics_gradient]

I thought it might be a good idea to start a thread for those of us just getting started with wet plate - I've got lots of little questions that keep coming up and don't want to clog up this whole subforum with them! Hoping this will become a resource for people interested in trying wet plate or starting out, and that some experienced members will also populate the thread and share their wisdom :)

This morning I was preparing the sandarac varnish and a few questions arose:

I seem to only get about ~20mL of the sandarac/alcohol mixture through a coffee filter before it effectively stops letting anything through. Is this unavoidable, or is there a better type of filtration I should use? It took quite a while (and quite a lot of filters!).
My recipe calls for 220mL ethanol and 38g of gum sandarac. Now that I've dissolved the gum and filtered everything, I'm left with just shy of 200mL, due to absorbtion from the filters and spillage. The next step is to add 22ml lavender oil and 4ml distilled water; my gut instinct is to do just that, but was wondering if I should reduce those slightly to compensate for the loss of the ethanol/sandarac solution?
I've got it in a nice clear lab bottle for now, but was thinking of moving it to an old glass pomegranate syrup bottle with a cork stopper I had laying around. In addition to freeing up the lab bottle, the syrup bottle is just the right size for the quantity I've made, and has a cool "Old World" look, not to mention a nice little spout for pouring. Any concerns with a cork stopper or would I be fine to use it for my varnish? It is quite a dark green class, so hard to tell the colour of the varnish or if there are any impurities in it, if that matters for anything down the road.
Is there a recommended way to clean the alcohol/sandarac residue off of glass? Found it very resistant to coming off.


I was also doing a test fit of some of the aluminium trophy plates I ordered and had a few questions there. The retailer indicated they were thin enough to be used without having to cut or modify the film holder, which is true. Like the other plates I've seen in videos, the actual dimensions are a little different than a standard 4x5 piece of sheet film, so it doesn't necessarily go under the rails that keep sheet film in place as it's not quite wide enough. On the other hand, it's ever so slightly longer than the exposed part. This seems to keep it more or less in place when the loading flap is shut, although giving it a firm whack does jostle it out of place.


Does anyone else shoot like this? Anything to I should be doing as far as technique, etc? I will be modifying a film holder for ambrotypes anyways, so not married to the idea.
I have a line on the trophy supplier whom the retailer buys from - they advertise being able to cut to spec, so I could potentially buy ones that fit the holder more exactly (be held in place by the film rails). Does anyone use plates wide enough to fit under the film rails of the holder? Any pros/cons to that method? I'm thinking the scratches they'd put in the emulsion would be a potential reason not to do it.


Plenty more to come, I'm sure!

[Two23]

I'll pass on the varnish questions but will discuss the holder. It sounds like you are trying to use a film holder. My thinking is this will gum up eventually and is not the way to go. What I suggest is buying a dedicated wet plate holder. The cheapest one for 4x5 I've found is from Lund, but I see you live at the end of the earth so shipping might be quite a bit, plus the shipping time. If you go the route of converting a holder then yes, you can cut to any dimension. I suggest using one of those heavy duty "guillotine" paper cutters.


Kent in SD

[Jason Greenberg Motamedi]

I seem to only get about ~20mL of the sandarac/alcohol mixture through a coffee filter before it effectively stops letting anything through. Is this unavoidable, or is there a better type of filtration I should use? It took quite a while (and quite a lot of filters!).

In my experience it is best to decant the varnish before filtering. I throw everything into a mason jar and shake it everytime I walk by for a few days. Then I let it sit for a few more days until all the bugs, sticks, and dirt is settled on the bottom of the jar. You can either carefully pour it into a coffee filter or better, suck it up from the top and drop into the filter (I use a disposable 5ml pipette). I think it takes two filters to get through the 250ml I typically make. If you pull the filter up off the bottom of the funnel so contact is minimal it helps the flow a bit. Typically I filter at least twice. First round with cheap coffee filters. Wait a day, decant and filter with more expensive filters.

[ethics_gradient]

I'll pass on the varnish questions but will discuss the holder. It sounds like you are trying to use a film holder. My thinking is this will gum up eventually and is not the way to go. What I suggest is buying a dedicated wet plate holder. The cheapest one for 4x5 I've found is from Lund, but I see you live at the end of the earth so shipping might be quite a bit, plus the shipping time. If you go the route of converting a holder then yes, you can cut to any dimension. I suggest using one of those heavy duty "guillotine" paper cutters.


Kent in SD

Thanks, Kent! My understanding is that it's fairly common to use converted 4x5 holders - what advantages as far as cleanliness do the dedicated ones have?

We do have some of those guillotine type cutters at work so I may try ordering larger sheets and cutting my own if it's much cheaper.


In my experience it is best to decant the varnish before filtering. I throw everything into a mason jar and shake it everytime I walk by for a few days. Then I let it sit for a few more days until all the bugs, sticks, and dirt is settled on the bottom of the jar. You can either carefully pour it into a coffee filter or better, suck it up from the top and drop into the filter (I use a disposable 5ml pipette). I think it takes two filters to get through the 250ml I typically make. If you pull the filter up off the bottom of the funnel so contact is minimal it helps the flow a bit. Typically I filter at least twice. First round with cheap coffee filters. Wait a day, decant and filter with more expensive filters.

I happened to wind up doing a similar process: I kept it by the computer and gave it a good shake every now and then yesterday, then let it sit overnight. Pretty much everything had settled to the bottom by the morning, but I dumped everything into a Pyrex measuring cup then filtered - wound up doing two filtering runs as well. I'm quite happy with the clarity of the finished product, but next time I'll be more careful to try and keep the dregs out of the initial decanting, even if it costs me some volume. What are the more expensive types of filters that you use?

[Two23]

Thanks, Kent! My understanding is that it's fairly common to use converted 4x5 holders - what advantages as far as cleanliness do the dedicated ones have?

We do have some of those guillotine type cutters at work so I may try ordering larger sheets and cutting my own if it's much cheaper.



I happened to wind up doing a similar process: I kept it by the computer and gave it a good shake every now and then yesterday, then let it sit overnight. Pretty much everything had settled to the bottom by the morning, but I dumped everything into a Pyrex measuring cup then filtered - wound up doing two filtering runs as well. I'm quite happy with the clarity of the finished product, but next time I'll be more careful to try and keep the dregs out of the initial decanting, even if it costs me some volume. What are the more expensive types of filters that you use?


The dedicated holders are easier to clean, and that's important. If gunk builds up along the edges it tends to migrate back onto the next plate. This causes flaws. The dedicated holders are also easier to use than your current method. Chamonix makes a very nice holder and they can ship from China. Theirs too are "film size" and not true 4x5 inch.


Kent in SD

[Jason Greenberg Motamedi]

What are the more expensive types of filters that you use?

I use medium-speed filter paper from a local lab supply. I have quantitative filters (as opposed to qualitative) but I don't think this matters.

[lightfootwillwalkinthecat]

I'm gathering materials to build a 12"X12" wet plate film holder... I'll be using Baltic Birch 3mm plywood in layers and was thinking of using a sheet of PVC as the layer that the wet plate will come in contact with in the corners to hold. Just so it would be easier to clean the mess... also an option is to polyurethane that layer of wood. any thoughts ?

[ethics_gradient]

I'm gathering materials to build a 12"X12" wet plate film holder... I'll be using Baltic Birch 3mm plywood in layers and was thinking of using a sheet of PVC as the layer that the wet plate will come in contact with in the corners to hold. Just so it would be easier to clean the mess... also an option is to polyurethane that layer of wood. any thoughts ?

Polyeurethane is what is applied to the wood in standard holders (I believe Charmonix does this with theirs as well, but am open to being corrected), but if you can fit in some acrylic that would be ideal and your plate will pick up fewer contaminants. It also keeps the silver nitrate from dissolving the wood underneath, which is the main concern. The plate will also pick up contaminants when it bumps against one of the wooden sides, so if you are doing the bit it lays on in acrylic, might as well do those too.

[lightfootwillwalkinthecat]

having trouble finding the answer to this question... what is the "visual" difference between positive on glass vs tin "trophy plate" visually, is one richer, more or less contrast, more dynamic range then the other...

[paulbarden]

having trouble finding the answer to this question... what is the "visual" difference between positive on glass vs tin "trophy plate" visually, is one richer, more or less contrast, more dynamic range then the other...

It is my experience that an Ambrotype (positive on glass) has a better tonal range, better blacks and gives an overall better image than one made on trophy plate. I've stopped using trophy plate altogether: you can always get a much nicer image on glass, if only because you can back it with a very black material and so the contrast instantly looks much better than the "dark grey" of trophy plate. That stuff ain't really BLACK.

[lightfootwillwalkinthecat]

Thank you for that... Its good to hear because I'm leaning more towards glass...

[MajorGlory78]

Hello wet-plate friends,

I'd would like to update you on some of the progress I've made (thanks in part to your excellent feedback) and I hope you guys can help me with my last (but possibly most important) question.

Last time I posted, I mentioned I had issues with very fragile collodion. Almost any contact with water/developer/fixer would cause ridges, sweeps or both....Switching to a own-made and premade collodion with cadmium changed all that (both work fine). It is a much thicker collodion and although I still have to treat it with care and respect, it is much less fragile and now only the edges of the image are sometimes a bit rough (as is to be expected). At the same time I switched to a slower developer which is advertised as such and now I can easely watch my image appear over 40-50 seconds, so no rush there either. In short: I think I got the collodion and the developing down by now and I am getting the tones, detail and depth I am looking for.....

However one thing is driving me crazy and I can't seem to find a fix: My images are overall always way to dark! I doesn't seem to matter if I overexpose for ages. I can't seem to get the light into the image. Could it be that my lenses are blocking UV? Or blue? I use two Fujinon W 1:5.6 lenses with Copal shutters. One 150mm, the other 300mm. Judging by some expert websites both lenses are single-coated. I have checked the reflections in the glass elements under a lamp and only one color is visible, so that would seem to support the one-coating theory. Does this coating block UV? Would anybody have a clue? I mean, I know it's winter and light isn't at it's brightest these days but even on a cloudy day outside in the garden I should be able to get a proper image right? Exposure times of 20 to 30 seconds don't even work....And I am not doing portrait work, it's just simple still life shots, so I can expose as much as I want....

Hope to hear from you!

[paulbarden]

Can you show us an example plate, please?


Hello wet-plate friends,

I'd would like to update you on some of the progress I've made (thanks in part to your excellent feedback) and I hope you guys can help me with my last (but possibly most important) question.

Last time I posted, I mentioned I had issues with very fragile collodion. Almost any contact with water/developer/fixer would cause ridges, sweeps or both....Switching to a own-made and premade collodion with cadmium changed all that (both work fine). It is a much thicker collodion and although I still have to treat it with care and respect, it is much less fragile and now only the edges of the image are sometimes a bit rough (as is to be expected). At the same time I switched to a slower developer which is advertised as such and now I can easely watch my image appear over 40-50 seconds, so no rush there either. In short: I think I got the collodion and the developing down by now and I am getting the tones, detail and depth I am looking for.....

However one thing is driving me crazy and I can't seem to find a fix: My images are overall always way to dark! I doesn't seem to matter if I overexpose for ages. I can't seem to get the light into the image. Could it be that my lenses are blocking UV? Or blue? I use two Fujinon W 1:5.6 lenses with Copal shutters. One 150mm, the other 300mm. Judging by some expert websites both lenses are single-coated. I have checked the reflections in the glass elements under a lamp and only one color is visible, so that would seem to support the one-coating theory. Does this coating block UV? Would anybody have a clue? I mean, I know it's winter and light isn't at it's brightest these days but even on a cloudy day outside in the garden I should be able to get a proper image right? Exposure times of 20 to 30 seconds don't even work....And I am not doing portrait work, it's just simple still life shots, so I can expose as much as I want....

Hope to hear from you!

[MajorGlory78]

Good evening all,

I should have included some examples, that would have been the wise thing to do. However, after struggeling to understand why I had such a hard time getting the exposure right, I was afraid the lenses I bought might have a UV coating (which is bad for wet plate I've learned, as it is mainly sensitive to the blue and UV spectrum). So I decided to get a picture of the lens (to get all the numbers, names, serials etc.) and look it up online.....Then I noticed something....

it....had....a....daylight....filter....screwed.....in.....front....of....the....lens.....

Luckily not blocking UV, but blocking a lot of blue.....stupid me, never checked after buying the camera and lenses. But hey, I found it. Onwards we go (or so I thought). By now I ran out of collodion and since the opinions on pre-mixed ready made collodion are pretty straight forward me and my friend decided to mix our own. We did, had it ripen and started working with it. It worked fine! We were really happy. After a few days however we got really bad comets in our images (I will include examples this time). So we decided to filter everything we made ourselves (collodion, developer, fixer, silvernitrate bath). But the marks kept appearing. We bought a small bottle of ready made collodion and developer, simply to start ruling out possible causes. This improved (a lot!) but small comets remained. So, we filtered the silverbath again and did not try our own mix. We stayed with the ready made stuff. Still small comets keep appearing.

We can not pinpoint the exact cause. The collodion seems the most likely culprit, but we are still not sure. Any hints in the right direction would be much appreciated!

I hope to return the advice favor one day on these forums ;)

These are minor:
234926

These are terrible:
234927

This one is the absolute worst:
234931

[paulbarden]

Are you cleaning out the plate holder after every single plate?

[MajorGlory78]

Are you cleaning out the plate holder after every single plate?

We have two plateholders in use. One is indeed very dirty. We did not use that one for any of the images in my example. We did clean the other in between plates. At the same time: The images with the minor comets are made with the pre-mixed collodion. The ones with the worse comets (second and last image) are from the old batch of our own collodion. My fear is that we introduced dirt into one of the chemicals (most likely the silvertank). But, judging from your question I suspect your advice would be to thoroughly clean both plateholders, filter the silverbath(s) a couple of times (is standard coffee filter ok?) and (just to be sure) use the collodion with the cleanest results for now?

Thanks again for your knowledge!

[lightfootwillwalkinthecat]

Can I use cooking oil to practice pouring collodion on my glass plates ?
I'm having trouble getting it right and I don't want to waist collodion :)
or is there something better to practice with ? I tried water but it doesn't coat the surface like collodion.
Thanks for any advice...

[Two23]

Can I use cooking oil to practice pouring collodion on my glass plates ?
I'm having trouble getting it right and I don't want to waist collodion :)
or is there something better to practice with ? I tried water but it doesn't coat the surface like collodion.
Thanks for any advice...


Yes, but I would suggest pancake syrup. It's water soluble and easy to wash off and then dry so you can reuse over and over.


Kent in SD

[Two23]

(1) The images with the minor comets are made with the pre-mixed collodion.
(2)The ones with the worse comets (second and last image) are from the old batch of our own collodion.
(3) My fear is that we introduced dirt into one of the chemicals (most likely the silvertank). But, judging from your question I suspect your advice would be to thoroughly clean both plateholders,
(4)filter the silverbath(s) a couple of times (is standard coffee filter ok?) and (just to be sure) use the collodion with the cleanest results for now?

Thanks again for your knowledge!


1. Most likely a chunk of something fell onto the plate during or just after pouring. Example would be a bit of dried collodion from the bottle.
2. This is classic contamination seeping back onto the edges of the plate from a dirty plate holder. Clean the edges of the holders with alcohol with paper towel using scrubbing motion, and then go back with q-tip and distilled water forcing it into the corners and wiping them out. I clean the plate holder well with bit of paper towel after EVERY shot. Make sure it's dry. Same for edges of the dark slide. Also, there's a chance you are waiting too long to stick plate into the silver and it's drying out a little.. Mostly though it looks like contaminated plate holder.
3. Less likely the bath.
4. Coffee filter x2 is fairly good, but I follow up with a large sized (about inch in diameter) cotton ball poked down into the neck of the funnel. I filter through cotton balls until they come out clean.


Kent in SD

[cpjfox]

Howdy all, i’ve got some big plans for a wet plate project, but Initially i plan to master the technique at the tiny size of only 4 x 5” ;)

Google has popped up with 4 main brands of plate holder prices ranging from $148 - $260 plus a bunch of freight in my currency (NZD).

My question, are they all equal? Chroma Camera / Lund Photographics / Zebra / Chamonix.

I would hate to get the cheapest (Zebra) and find it an impediment to my growth in this new (to me) format, if it’s really worth the extra $100 i’ll go for the Chamonix, it certainly looks more beautiful than the others, or maybe an even better brand exists that I haven't found yet?

[paulbarden]

Howdy all, i’ve got some big plans for a wet plate project, but Initially i plan to master the technique at the tiny size of only 4 x 5” ;)

Google has popped up with 4 main brands of plate holder prices ranging from $148 - $260 plus a bunch of freight in my currency (NZD).

My question, are they all equal? Chroma Camera / Lund Photographics / Zebra / Chamonix.

I would hate to get the cheapest (Zebra) and find it an impediment to my growth in this new (to me) format, if it’s really worth the extra $100 i’ll go for the Chamonix, it certainly looks more beautiful than the others, or maybe an even better brand exists that I haven't found yet?

I am familiar with only two of these holders: The Lund and the Chamonix. I bought the Lund first and disliked it immensely, so I bought the Chamonix and was very pleased with how much better it was.

[Ian David]

There are also holders made by In Camera Industries but I have never used them

[Tin Can]

Be aware Wet Plate is very messy when compared to Dry Plate

Clean up in field

Portable Dark Room

Many use Vans or Trailers

or

https://youtu.be/78tfSJhoTQA

I was going to use a large cargo trailer

I no longer drive, so I sold the truck and trailer

I hope you are watching the 100's of youtube on Wet Plate

[Mark Sawyer]

The cheapest and arguably best 4x5 wet plate holder is a converted 4x5 Graflex film pack adapter. Usually $10 to $20, and all-metal construction.

[Eric in Vegas]

I am pulling together everything I need to take my first crack at wet plate and have questions about exposure. I will be shooting a Burke and James 5x7 with an unnamed brass lens in the bright Las Vegas sun. I plan to use a test strip with 5-6 exposures as I saw in a Lund tutorial but am not sure I know what to use as a baseline exposure. Using the Sunny-16 rule and an ISO of 2, I'd be looking at an exposure of 1/2 which wouldn't work without a mechanical shutter. I feel like I either need to look at stopping down to f/32, looking for shade, or I'm on the completely wrong track?

[paulbarden]

I am pulling together everything I need to take my first crack at wet plate and have questions about exposure. I will be shooting a Burke and James 5x7 with an unnamed brass lens in the bright Las Vegas sun. I plan to use a test strip with 5-6 exposures as I saw in a Lund tutorial but am not sure I know what to use as a baseline exposure. Using the Sunny-16 rule and an ISO of 2, I'd be looking at an exposure of 1/2 which wouldn't work without a mechanical shutter. I feel like I either need to look at stopping down to f/32, looking for shade, or I'm on the completely wrong track?

Odds are that brass lens is something slow-ish: maybe f8 or f11, so if you're working in blazing bright sun, it will potentially be difficult to get the correct exposure. If yo9u have a neutral density filter, use that and start with 1 second and work up. All you can do is try it and see what you get, then go from there. You might have to work with more suitable light conditions if all you have for a lens is a magic lantern lens with an effective aperture of f5.6 or f8.
Does that lens have and adjustable aperture??

[Eric in Vegas]

Odds are that brass lens is something slow-ish: maybe f8 or f11, so if you're working in blazing bright sun, it will potentially be difficult to get the correct exposure. If yo9u have a neutral density filter, use that and start with 1 second and work up. All you can do is try it and see what you get, then go from there. You might have to work with more suitable light conditions if all you have for a lens is a magic lantern lens with an effective aperture of f5.6 or f8.
Does that lens have and adjustable aperture??

Hi Paul, thank you for the response. The lens does have an adjustable aperture though it is enroute to me now and I haven't had much time to study it. Based on your response, I take it I am on the right track...that conventional exposure calculations still essentially apply to collodion and using an ISO of 2 is a good place to start? Have you had much luck with ND filters and wet plate? I have ND plates that I've used to make my own ND filters for my Graflex and old 8mm movie cameras. Thanks again Paul.

[paulbarden]

Hi Paul, thank you for the response. The lens does have an adjustable aperture though it is enroute to me now and I haven't had much time to study it. Based on your response, I take it I am on the right track...that conventional exposure calculations still essentially apply to collodion and using an ISO of 2 is a good place to start? Have you had much luck with ND filters and wet plate? I have ND plates that I've used to make my own ND filters for my Graflex and old 8mm movie cameras. Thanks again Paul.

If your lens has a proper aperture with f-stop values, that's great. You'll need to be able to stop down in bright sunlight if you have no shutter. I've not used ND filters with my work because I don't do wet plate work in bright sunlight. I find it far too harsh.

Your guesses as to starting exposures is a fine starting point. Expect to make a test strip plate at maybe f11 or f16, starting with 1 second, and doubling it with every additional strip (as per Lund). Bright sunlight is pretty easy to get to know, it's when you use filtered/indoor light, or artificial light that things get mighty tricky.

[Eric in Vegas]

If your lens has a proper aperture with f-stop values, that's great. You'll need to be able to stop down in bright sunlight if you have no shutter. I've not used ND filters with my work because I don't do wet plate work in bright sunlight. I find it far too harsh.

Your guesses as to starting exposures is a fine starting point. Expect to make a test strip plate at maybe f11 or f16, starting with 1 second, and doubling it with every additional strip (as per Lund). Bright sunlight is pretty easy to get to know, it's when you use filtered/indoor light, or artificial light that things get mighty tricky.

Thanks again Paul for the assurance. The one thing you can count on in Las Vegas is bright sunlight. I hope to use its predictability to mitigate one variable while learning the wet plate process. Thanks again Paul.

[Wesito]

Hi all! I posted this in Cameras, but realised it might be better here... :)

My wife and I are planning on starting a wet plate studio and are up to our ears in research for the "best place to start" ...

Our concept is to do studio portraits with a Petzval lens and 5x7 format -- we love the extra sharp central focus with bokeh --- (then upgrade to 8x10 when we improve) --- we've located a 13x18cm 1880s J. Audouin camera with a Dallmeyer 1a lens (from our understanding this is a Petzval-esque lens, correct? --- any knowledge or suggestions are welcome here, too!

We also plan on doing gallery exhibitions that showcase aspects of our city - market stalls, store fronts, etc... This is where we are really stuck ---we love extra sharp focus as well as edges with imperfections / blur etc--- which lens / wet plate camera type/size, etc would work best for this? ... We do appreciate the aesthetic and feel of natural "imperfections" within wet plate.

Thank you in advance for any help or suggestions! :o

[paulbarden]

Please see post #17 on this page (https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?176028-Wet-Plate-for-Architectural-amp-Portrait/page2).