Photo 1 – Sabbatier effect – due 2/17

Standard

Look at the following sites:

cool samples

sabbatier steps

variations to consider

After working in the darkroom on the sabbatier effect, post things you learned that were successful procedures in order to share  them with others.

Advertisements

13 responses »

  1. What I have learned from doing the sabbatier effect in the dark room was that it was not as tough as I thought it was. My very first attempt turn out successful and i didn’t even use any test strips. What I did was I looked at my high contrast negative and estimated how much time it should spend exposed to the light. I found more success by exposing the negative for half the time it would usually take to create a normal enlargement. I then partially developed it until the point hat it was almost completely developed and then exposed it for the second half of time. They all turned out great!

  2. I have only done one sabbatier so far, but what I found helped the most was not waiting until i saw the faint outline of something in the developer, but just holding it under the developer for a couple seconds and then moving it to the wash. If I wait until I can see the outline, at least for me, it’s already too late and the photo ends up looking normal.

  3. I too have only done one sabbatier so far, but what I found for it was if your picture is not too contrasty, do more than one exposure/development cycle and only dip it in the developer for a few seconds as well. Increasing the time on my print for the second exposure also helped.

  4. I have only done one successful sabbatier photo so far, but my photo was pretty contrast-y, so I think that helped. I exposed the photo initially with the negative in the enlarger for 20% less time than usual and then left it in the developer until I saw the faint outline, and a little bit of shading, then I moved it into the wash. Once I took it out of the wash, I removed the negative from the enlarger and actually kept the light at the full brightness. Then I exposed the photo for 20% of how I usually do. Example: if I usually expose a photo for 12 seconds, I expose it for about 9, let it sit in the developer until I start seeing a faint outline and some shading, put it in the wash, and expose it again for just over 3 seconds.

  5. Ha Ha! Still technically the 17th! Anyway, I have only done one successful sabatier development thus far,however it turned out pretty well. In my experience, you don’t actually need a very contrasty photo for a sabater if you expose it for a shorter time than usual the first time and a longer time that usual the second, (I used about two seconds the first time and three the second on a relatively un-contrastey photo and it tuned out pretty well. It is my artistic opinion that what makes a great sabater is not how contrastey it is, as this can be readied by experimentation, instead, the defining criteria should be this: dose preforming the sabateer effect enhance the picture and make it more visually interesting than the regular development process would. Unfortunately, for a lot of sabateers, this is not the case, however when it is, the difference is apparent. On a different topic, I somehow got a fingerprint into a dark place of the sabateer and it makes a pretty awesome design and doesn’t go over into any lighter places. While I don’t yet know how this phenomenon occurred, I postulate that touching the surface of the print after it is developed the first time but before it is exposed the second time might have caused it. This warrants further experimentation.

    • So you didn’t take the negative out when you reexposed it – or did you? Or are you saying the second exposure is just slightly more than you would have added to make it right the first time? The fingerprint comes when you touch your paper with a moist finger and that picks up the emulsion from the paper so that it cannot expose in the fingerprint lines because the emulsion is gone. (usually a sweaty finger will do this but I had a student do this with bare footprints on a photogram…..from sweaty feet that picked up some of the emulsion)

  6. I tried the sabbatier with various negatives until it finally worked out. The first time it didn’t show up because the picture was too simple. So i switched to a negative with multiple dogs and more shapes, however this still only worked marginally well. I realized that it would only show up in very light areas and the rest of the print would come out normal. So i switched again to a print with light areas scattered through out and it turned out pretty good. So for me, finding the right negative and visualizing how it might look is the most important part in the process.

  7. Each time i did the sabbateir effect I experimented with a different amount of seconds, various times of taking the picture out of the developer, and different light settings. I found that every negative is completely different in the amount of time you need the various steps to stay on. The first time i did the sabbatier effect it just looked like the original print because I let the paper stay in the developer for too long, so then the next time i tried I took it out earlier. Everything depends on the negative and the amount of time you expose everything to.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s