Cyanotype and Argyrotype paper testing

I'm making a set of sample prints for UCA at the moment; They want examples of alternative processes for use on open days etc. so I'm taking the opportunity to do a bit of testing while I'm at it.   Many practitioners recommend certain papers and the differences can be quite marked.  Recommendations are interesting but also frustrating at times. Talbot apparently favoured 'Whatman's Turkey Mill' writing paper for his calotypes but this is long-defunct and nobody seems exactly sure what was the magic quality it possessed!

lots of test pieces - all A3 size.

Finding papers

Like Talbot, many guides to process emotion papers which turn out to be either unavailable or ultra-expensive.  Here I won't be extolling the virtues of 'Buggins' patent Premium Heliofibre' (which, as I'm sure you know is hand-made by Tibetan monks under moonlight and washed in unicorn's tears) or the like. - Just stuff readily available in the UK. All the papers below are available either from specialists like Silverprint or decent-sized art shops. (although I'm not sure about the sketch pad stuff!)

Papers tested.

Seawhite Watercolour Acid-free 350gsm 

Fabriano Aquarello Watercolour (25% cotton) cold pressed 300gsm /140lbs 

Arches Aquarelle Watercolour cold pressed 300gsm /140lbs 

Daler Rowney Aquafine smooth hot pressed Watercolour (100% cellulose) 300gsm /140lbs 

Victor Stationery Sketch Pad paper (no specs but much thinner and lighter than the others here. - I bought a big bundle of it in a charity shop for very little money) 

Arches Platine hot pressed 310gsm 

If you're not familiar with paper terminology, 'gsm' is grammes per square metre. and the heavier the weight the thicker the paper stock. 'lbs' is a bit more complicated as it refers to the weight of a ream (500 sheets) of a given paper in its 'basis size' - but again, more weight = thicker stock.  'Cold pressed' papers have a rougher, more textured surface than 'hot pressed'.  'Watercolour' in a title is generally a good thing as it means a paper will absorb liquids well and generally stand up to rinsing etc. without falling apart. 'Acid free' and papers with lots of cotton fibres are also (usually) desirable qualities.  All of this said, test whatever you have: Sometimes a cheap, unimpressive paper can yield great results. - which is why I buy stuff like the sketch pads above.- you never know!

Consistency is key

For these tests I used the same batch of sensitiser, coating technique, drying method, exposure time and processing. The negative has a very full range so any differences should be apparent.  For the record the processing sequences were:

Cyanotype: A: 25g Ferric Ammoniun Citrate per 100ml distilled water.  B: 10g Potassium Ferricyanide per 100ml distilled water. Brush coated* and air dried overnight. Exposure: 11min in my LED UV box, 1min rinse in distilled water, 5 min rinse in running tap water, 30 sec in Hydrogen Peroxide bath (1%) then 1 min post-rinse in running tap water.                                                                                                         *I made both single and double-coated test sheets for everything.

Argyrotype: Fotospeed pre-mixed sensitiser. 5ml per 12"x16" sheet, rod coated and air dried overnight. Exposure: 5 min in the UV box. 5min rinse in distilled water,  3min fix in 7% sodium thiosulphate solution (made with distilled water) 30 min rinse in running tap water.

Cyanotype results

The prints were remarkably similar.  Despite brush coating, which means it's not easy to ensure consistent coverage there wasn't much to choose between the finished prints. 

As expected, the very thin 'Sketch Pad' stock was the worst, with a weak, patchy tone and limited tonal depth Its also horrible to work with, cockling and buckling when coating, very floppy and fragile to process and about as flat as a poppadum when dried! It may be ideal for some process but not these!

'Sketch Pad' paper

  

The Arches Platine was hard to rinse clean, with a distinct yellow tone to the highlights. - This will eventually darken to blue-grey as it's residual toner in the fibres.  Longer washing might clear it but that could reduce the blue tone too. Double coating increased the depth of colour but only by a small amount, and the yellow highlights were twice as bad. Arches Platine was specifically developed for platinum and palladium printing and its been the default alt. process paper at specialists like Silverprint for a long time, but it's not the best for cyanotype.  

Arches Platine

Daler-Rowney Aquafine was better, giving a good, strong blue -or deep blue-black if double coated and nice clean whites. Its cheap if bought in big, thick pads of 50 sheets and easy to use. The surface is quite smooth- almost bland but if this was a consumer review I'd mark it as 'best value'. Ideal for learning and experimenting. 

Daler Rowney Aquafine

The Arches Watercolour managed a slightly better colour, but like its 'Platine' cousin it showed a yellowing in the highlights. - This wasn't a strong as with Platine but it's there and, annoyingly only really visible when fully dried. - They looked fine in the darkroom wash! 

Arches 300gsm watercolour

Next is the Fabriano Aquarello which produces a lovely deep tone, especially when double coated. There may be just a hint of yellowing. - (I might try 5 min in the distilled water wash plus 5 min in tap water) but it's good stuff.  

Fabriano 300gsm watercolour paper

Finally the Seawhite 350gsm watercolour paper.  This is the thickest paper and has, I think absorbed more sensitiser. Not only is the tone lovely and rich, with a great blue-black colour in the shadows (again, double coating is marginally better than single coating) but the overall image looks darker. The tone separation is the best (see the dark area in the centre of the image) and the texture is pleasing. The texture is more pronounced on one side of the paper so you can choose between two surfaces in one sheet. - definitely my favourite and happily, not the most expensive!

Seawhite 350gsm watercolour paper

(by the way, the image I chose is an iPhone picture of raindrops on the roof of my car, printed as a 10.5 in x 15in digital negative. It's quite contrasty -if anything, a bit strong. Something with more subtle mid-tones might have been more appropriate))

Argyrotype results.

This is a trickier process and as the sensitiser is quite pricey and harder to coat evenly I used the glass rod technique, putting a measured amount (5ml) onto each A3 sheet. Double coating is possible but I find it tends to reduce overall contrast without contributing much to the maximum density. It 'dries down' a LOT- about 1 stop/zone according to the instructions but most of the darkening takes place in the shadows. Negs for Argyrotype need quite a bit of boosting in the shadow areas (if making digital negs apply a curve to give your neg more density and contrast in the shadow areas - I'm doing some experiments on this but keep getting sidetracked by other work!). Careful tests are important to get the best from each paper but I went for a standard 'average' time of 300 sec (5 minutes) exposure for every print.

(My test image this time was my 'Open Door' (after Talbot) picture. Made on a DSLR and printed as a 10in x 14in digital negative).  My correction curve is quite crude but now I've found the most promising paper stock, hopefully I can get back to the curve tests soon. 

the 'Open Door' setup...

Again, the 'sketch pad' stock was pretty dreadful: misbehaving physically (floppy and fragile when wet, curly and pine to creasing when dry) and with the weakest tone. It just can't absorb enough sensitiser:

'Sketchpad' stock. - it actually looks better on the screen than in reality!

Next was the Daler Rowney paper. This didn't do nearly as well as it had for cyanotypes. The tone is blotchy and pale..

Daler Rowney 300gsm watercolour paper

Next was the Arches 300gsm. I really want this paper to be great at something as the pads are so beautiful! However, it's not the best for Argyrotype. There's a 'veiling' effect which isn't as bad as the Daler Rowney but it weakens the shadows.

Arches 300gsm watercolour paper

The Arches Platine is much better, albeit colder in tone:

Arches Platine paper

Seawhite 350gsm is good, with a much better tone and shadow density.

Seawhite 350gsm

Fabriano 300gsm  has the edge though. The blacks are noticeably deeper than any of the other papers and while it's a bit over-contrasty, this should be easy to solve with a bit of negative curve adjustment ( I really have to do those tests now!)

Fabriano 300gsm watercolour paper

So if you're the type of person who skips straight to the end for the verdict on what to buy, I'd say Fabriano 300 for Argyrotype (interestingly they supply "Fabriano 5" paper in the Fotospeed kits) and Seawhite 350gsm for cyanotypes. 

As Argyrotype sensitiser is expensive, it doesn't make much sense economising on paper while learning the process, but if you're on a tight budget or making lots of prints, the Daler Rowney paper is excellent for the price.

As you can see (I hope!) from the pictures there's quite a difference in colour with Argyrotype on different papers, so that may also be a factor.  If you have a favourite paper not mentioned here I'd love to hear about it. - Please share your results and experiments. - Its what we're here for!  - Peter Renn