About Malde Ware PT/PD method speed

I think this post is mostly addressed to Keith and Walker but will thank any entry coming from whoever is already working with the process in the subject line.
I’m copy-pasting my post to FB pt/pd group:

Any one out there making Malde Ware pt/pd prints ? I’m not sure I’m taming the beast or is it me that I’m tamed by it. I dare to say prints look better using MW chems than some other Pt/Pd before this one but then I wonder how long are your regular exposure times for digital negs and film negs too. Was testing today a film neg made with HP5 on an 8x10 sheet because this is a well known neg. Also tested printing a collodion neg on glass. Both used a bit too long time to expose correctly. I’d say longer than with any other Pt/Pd I had used before. Any insight, ideas, experiences, etc will be thanked. Cheers all

What really made me wonder about this is the speed of MW emulsion compared to other processes like “regular” or traditional pt/pd systems existing before. My prints are taking much longer exposure times than almost any other process. Any hint will be appreciated. This be it with film negs or digital negs, of course.


Because this is a print-out process it will take anywhere from 30 to 200% more exposure vs develope out. That variance is based on how much humidity is in the paper and if you have the correct solution amount and tween/glycerin amount (if required).

In general I’ve seen a 30% increase in time when the paper is at about 60% RH and with method 2 (neutral) printing.

Lower humidity = drastically longer exposure times but also = ability to print thinner negs.


so good to hear that, and I’m printing neutral too. many thanks for your clear explanation. you’re helping me sleep well tonight.
And as for RH mine is about only 45% being a hot summer outside and A/C inside so RH comes drastically down. I think I’d have to build a humidification chamber as Pradip suggests.
thank you

PS: Walker, may I copy your response to FB ? I think more than one would like to know…

Hi Pablo,

My experience using PiezoDN negs on Gampi Torinoko, and trying to match the image color of the Malde-Ware process as closely as I can to what I was getting with standard Pd developed in hot PO, is that exposure time for Malde-Ware with straight Pd is longer by a factor of 2.67, which is derived from:
M-W time 480 / Std time 180 = 2.67

This is using a humidification to 75% in an enclosed tray with a saturated slurry of NaCl. This paper prints very warm with the M-W process, necessitating the higher humidity than I’ve found necessary with other Revere which is the only other paper I’ve used with it so far except for a few test prints.

A way overcooked 8x10 TMX negative that I have never been able to print before with a highlight Dmax of 3.05 and a shadow Dmin of 0.60 for a Density Range of 2.45 ( about 2 full stops more than a typical 1.80 DR target for negs intended for standard Pd printing!) prints beautifully with M-W Pt/Pd on Revere humidified to 55% with a slurry of calcium nitrate in the magic box, and an exposure time of about 26 minutes or 30000 units on the dosage meter. This is using a large bank (24"x40") of tightly packed Philips Actinic BL fluorescent bulbs that were new as of 1 year ago.

That seems to be a bit more of an exposure increase for me than what Walker reports, but “it is what it is” as someone once said. One of the beauties of POP printing is that it’s really hard to overexpose since the deep shadows self-mask to some degree. You may lose contrast in the shadows but they seldom block up completely. Expose your LF camera negs for the highlights and let the shadows fall where they may. You can of course alter humidification and metal mix to adjust contrast but then you sacrifice control over image color. This is not really a problem with digital negs since they can be tailored to whatever set of print characteristics you like.


Our dev-out “unit” measure is 129 and our print-out “unit” measure is 175 for revere at 56% RH Meth2. This is with a plate burner which translated into PPM2 units is 2516 for dev-out and 3413 for print-out. It’s about a 1/3+ increase in exposure. Interestingly doubling the exposure of the dev-out to an insane 6826 will increase the dMax slightly (from 1.41 to 1.44) but the required density in the mid-highlights of the neg and the resulting instability of linearization made it not worth it to go there.

Hola Keith, always nice to hear from you. Thanks for the worthy info you’re writing. It must be that I’m that used to the “older” exposure times that made me wonder. Now I see and feel much better. I’m exposing with an old plate burner argentinean made with 1000 wat mercury halide bulb which must be about a year old or so. Traditional Pt/Pd prints were about 120 units in that burner, MW 50+50 pd and pt are about 200 when using digital negs. As for film negs I’ll try again and that’s the way I was exposing film too, shooting for highlights and letting shadows to fall wherever they do. What I need to give a try again is the humidification chamber since my workspace is about 45% RH at 26 C. I had set up a NaCl chamber before, will be back to it soon. Whatever, this process is a real wonder, no matter how warm the prints comes out but yes, I’d go a bit colder in the near future. Thanks a regards. Pablo

Gracias Walker, by the way, the paper I was testing is Arches Platine the lighter version and even with an albumin coating which gives a very nice look to the print.