Digital BW, The Print

I assume the green silver prints you remember were on Kodak papers only? Agfa and Ilford had some pretty "neutral gray" tones before any toning. It also mattered on what developers you were using. We still print silver here for clients and the only real reason for doing a slight selenium toning is for archival reasons, not to get the print to be more "neutral".

Mark
http://www.stillrivereditions.com

On Aug 14, 2013, at 10:41 AM, David Kachel wrote:
> 
> 
> Let me play devil's advocate here and see if we can't stir the pot a bit�
> 
> 
> Before digital (BD), NO ONE, and I mean NO ONE, was after a "neutral"
> print!
> 
> Even when using warm tone papers, silver gelatin prints came out green. A
> sickly, nasty, repugnant, unacceptable, greeeeen!!!
> 
> Never, EVER, "neutral".
> 
> Photographers could hardly wait to get those nasty looking green prints
> into a toning bath, usually selenium (for a "cool purple sepia" color), in
> order to make that green color go away before the photographer threw up.
> 
> The goal was either selenium purple or one of hundreds of flavors of
> brown/sepia. I don't recall anyone ever seeking "neutral".
> 
> So my question is: when and how did "neutral" become the holy grail of B&W
> fine art photography?
> 
> Just to stir the pot a little more�
> 
> I challenge everyone to make three prints of the same image;
> 
> One "neutral", one selenium and one brown/sepia. Make all three as
> pleasing to yourself as you can.
> 
> Then I dare you to tell me you genuinely like the "neutral" print best!
> 
> And if by chance you DO like the neutral print best, why weren't you after
> that tone when you were printing silver?
> 
> If you never printed silver, go away sonny, you bother me!   ;-)
> 
> 
> 
> David Kachel
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]