Today, I am looking at the different steps required to make a cyanotype print from a 35mm negative using a microscope. The point of this experiment is to see if there are any steps which is loosing a lot of details and/or sharpness. I am also curious to look at the negatives under the microscope (both the analog and and "digital" one). Here is the image used for the test:
To make the cyanotype, I started from the scan of the 35mm frame, inverted it, made a few adjustment to the levels and contrast and printed it on a transparency film using my inkjet printer (see previous post about digital negatives). Then, the digital negative is contact printed to make the cyanotype.
This is a microscope picture of a tiny section of the the 35mm negative. The actual size of this portion is 0.85 x 0.64 mm. This is about 0.54 mm² which represents 0.036% of the frame. The picture has been inverted to have a positive image. The film is Ilford HP5+ shot at 400 ISO and developed in Kodak HC-110 Dil B for 5'00" at 20°C. The picture clearly shows the grain structure of the negative and the level of details which was captured. |
This is the corresponding crop of the image captured by the film scanner. The actual size for this section of the image is about 90 x 67 pixels. I have zoomed the image to clearly show the pixels and match the size of the image above. It is interesting to see how the scanner has averaged things to make the image. |
This is a microscope picture of the digital negative printed on the inkjet printer. The actual size here matches the final size of the print and measured 5.4 x 4.1 mm. The picture has been inverted to have a positive image. Compared to the original negative, we have an enlargement of 6.35 times. It is interesting to note the structure of the transparent film and the way the ink dots are distributed. It look more similar to the grain on the analog film than I expected. |
This is a microscope picture of the cyanotype print. The actual size is the same as for the digital negative: 5.4 x 4.1 mm. I have put it in black and white to match the other pictures (but in reality it is blue). The texture of the paper and its fibers are clearly visible but the level of detail of the image is very close to the digital file, much closer than I expected. |
Conclusion
What can we conclude from this experiment? Well, first it is fun to look at things with a microscope. Second, I am quite amazed by the image quality, details and sharpness which is achieved by cyanotype printing. Third, it look like the digital negative is able to capture all the details needed for printing. Before this experiment, I was concerned that the resolution of the digital negative was somewhat too low and could be a weak link in the process. It does not seem to be the case.