This site uses cookies.
Some of these cookies are essential to the operation of the site,
while others help to improve your experience by providing insights into how the site is being used.
For more information, please see the ProZ.com privacy policy.
Explanation: "Proper" photos used often to be toned with metals such as selenium, platinum, palladium, copper and gold. The resulting colour is not, as you might expect, gold! You can include the "gelatine" for completeness, but it's hardly necessary (though it's true that some emulsions were/are not gelatine-based)
-------------------------------------------------- Note added at 1 hr (2013-08-16 11:31:53 GMT) --------------------------------------------------
Rachel is correct: the (positive) image is inverted (negative) on the paper, which is then gold-toned to produce a blue-black image, if memory serves. Not a technique I have ever used, though!
That was my reading also. Gold oxide does exist, but is far from easy to make and decomposes at moderately high temperatures. I never tried any of these "exotic" techniques (palladium etc.), but selenium was de rigueur, especially for chlorobromide papers.
According to all the refs. I have been able to find, it is actually gold chloride, not oxide; and there's no reason why gold chloride shouldn't be used in this toning and/or development process. I think the 'oxide' is just a slip of the tongue by a non chemist ;-)
If we take the original phrase apart word by word, it is seen to be deeply ambiguous on at least two fronts: "Négatif sur papier" could be taken to mean either "on" or "onto", with the former implying that the image is a negative, while the latter may imply that the negative image is projected "onto" the paper, creating a positive. On balance of probability, "gold toning" is much more likely to be the chemical process rather than the physical (and rather naff) process of gold tinting with leaf or powder. As Tony points out, "révélée à l'oxyde d'or" does imply a chemical process, though how on earth you get a noble metal to oxidise in the darkroom I have no idea, though the Victorian pioneers had astonishing skills in chemistry.
I note from Asker's added context below (I hadn't spotted it before) that this is '...juste une image révélée à l’oxyde d’or,' — confirming once again that this is indeed all about the chemical gold toning process, which does NOT produce a gold-tinted image.
We do not have enough information to know why this is being labelled as a 'negative' — it could perfectly well be a negative image, these are used a lot in contemporary photography, so it is not correct to say it couldn't be a negative image. I have found quite a number of these mentioned in the context of contemporary photography exhibitions. It is also possible (though IMHO less likely) that this refers to an image printed FROM a negative; in that case, it seems odd that it would be a PAPER negative (not the easiest type to print from!); unless the text intended to say it was a print from a negative on ... paper; however, that would assume a rather excessive degree of 'telegraphing' of the text, which I feel is unlikely.
Naturally, it would help a great deal if Asker has any more information about this photograph, or the context in which this appears; is this, for example, in an exhibition catalogue or a sales catalogue? And what is the connection with 'concessions'?
'viré' refers to the specific chemical technique of 'toning', which is treating photographs with metallic salts to produce a change in colour. I do not know what colour gold toning produces, but the term in itself specifically does NOT mean simply 'gold-coloured'. In lay language, we tend to talk about 'sepia-tinted photographs' etc., but the correct technical term for this chemical technique is 'toning'.
This image is intended to take on a vintage aspect if that helps. The only clu I have in the text is this '...juste une image révélée à l’oxyde d’or,' I've researched the artist a bit and he appears to use a variet of different photographic techniques...
Let's not get too polemical. As Rachel kindly pointed out, my initial answer implied (stated, even) that the negative was gold-toned. This is possible but highly unlikely. As for the inversion of the image, there is insufficient context or clarity to decide for sure whether the resulting image is a negative, or whether the projected negative image creates a positive image which is then gold-toned. Most old-school photographers would understand "gold-toning" to be chemically similar to selenium or palladium toning, not "gold tinted".
Automatic update in 00:
Answers
19 mins confidence: peer agreement (net): +1
gold-toned negative on silver emulsion paper
Explanation: "Proper" photos used often to be toned with metals such as selenium, platinum, palladium, copper and gold. The resulting colour is not, as you might expect, gold! You can include the "gelatine" for completeness, but it's hardly necessary (though it's true that some emulsions were/are not gelatine-based)
-------------------------------------------------- Note added at 1 hr (2013-08-16 11:31:53 GMT) --------------------------------------------------
Rachel is correct: the (positive) image is inverted (negative) on the paper, which is then gold-toned to produce a blue-black image, if memory serves. Not a technique I have ever used, though!
chris collister France Local time: 17:42 Works in field Native speaker of: English PRO pts in category: 39
peer agreement (net): +1