There are metal replacement toners that replace the silver in a print with either gold or platinum. This way the print can be made normally with an enlarger and silver chemistry to overcome the contact printing limitation. Toning improves the longevity of the print and provides many of the same tonal effects, depending on how long the print sits in the bath. Unfortunately, the chemicals involved are quite toxic. I remember one of the instructors at the Rayko darkroom in San Francisco running a "toning day" and it was very busy with a number of people coming in to tone their work and share the considerable material and hazmat fees for the chemicals.<p>"unlike silver gelatin prints that hold the chemicals in a layer on top of the paper, platinum photography uses chemicals that are soaked into the paper, so the image lies embedded in its fibers."<p>Fiber paper for silver prints is also a thing, and easily available from commercial sources. It requires more extensive washing compared to RC (resin coated) paper, and it tends to curl and warp after wetting. To get prints flat after drying, you need a big heated press that looks like a giant panini maker.
>You can’t take a small negative and project it onto the paper, as you do with an enlarger for silver gelatin prints.<p>Pretty much sums up the point. Using 8x10 or whatever size negatives when film rolls were coming about is a non-starter for the general public.<p>The cost seems very high as the other commenter has mentioned also. From a quick search purchasing a kit will give you a printing cost of ~$15/photo. This immediately relegates it to the realm of hobbyists with money. Canvas prints of that size may be a bit cheaper for someone seeking something that’s a bit more special than a regular photo.
Carbon prints are both more stable and have a wider possible tonal range than platinum prints do. I’m not sure where he got the idea that platinum prints have a wide tonal range from. While they have exquisite highlight separation, they tend to have a rather compressed, flat tonal range. The dimensionality he talks about due to the emulsion sinking into the paper fibers is also a reason for the compressed tonal range.<p>Very few people use pure platinum salts. Most prefer a mix of platinum and palladium to get better darker tones. It is also more likely that vintage “platinum” prints are probably platinum toned Kallitypes.<p>All of the positive things he attributes to platinum prints are probably better applied to carbon prints. I think carbon is the ultimate printing medium for monotone photographs. Maximum control of tonal range, detail, and the best longevity.
Here's a resource for anyone that really wants to dive into this. Dick Arentz is a modern day master of the technique. His book is pretty much the definitive resource.<p><a href="https://www.dickarentz.com/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://www.dickarentz.com/</a>
It is of course still possible to do--you can get the chemicals, the cameras, the paper, etc. There are people still doing it. The number is not very large. It's nontrivial expense and labor. The prints are indeed very nice.
Hi everyone- I’m Matt Locke, who wrote this WITI, and I just want to say I love all your comments, especially about selenium toning, which we also did at Art School. This thread is quite the nostalgia trip for me. Thanks!
I didn’t even know this was a thing but would love to try this process out.<p>I was lucky enough to learn film development in high school, though now a days I don’t have access to a darkroom.<p>Which is unfortunate because many of my family members are photographers and used to have darkrooms in their homes.
WITI is a really cool newsletter BTW. I use this as an alternative to reddit/kottke/twitter in terms of fresh/interesting content, just because I'm sick and tired of all the nonsense on the other platforms.