RE: Mike Ware's POP Pt./Pd. Pt
Probably you are right. Add gold chloride and sodium tungstate as important chemicals to change colour as well. Cheers, Witho -----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- Van: EJN Photo [mailto:ejnphoto@sbcglobal.net] Verzonden: vrijdag 10 november 2006 20:31 Aan: alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca Onderwerp: RE: Mike Ware's POP Pt./Pd. Pt Witho, I think that you'll find that is related to the metal salt being used. Ware/Malde stays with PT as a common part of the coating solution. Zia (Sullivan/Weese) stay almost exclusively, and certainly early on in the promotion of it, palladium salts with color changes being controlled by the cation; NA, Li, Cs. Eric Neilsen Photography 4101 Commerce Street, Suite 9 Dallas, TX 75226 214-827-8301 http://ericneilsenphotography.com Skype : ejprinter > -----Original Message----- > From: Witho Worms [mailto:info@witho.nl] > Sent: Friday, November 10, 2006 11:19 AM > To: alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca > Subject: RE: Mike Ware's POP Pt./Pd. Pt > > In my former mail I used a lot of times the I word. In fact it > was If and > In. Must be Freudian. Maybe still not correct English but > already better and > sending it twice gives me the opportunity to make my point > ...., Freudian? > > I do want to say something in respect to POP. If you start from > the > descriptions Carl Weese and Dick Sullivan have given, you will > find out that > humidity is NOT at all important as long as you keep the > humidity of the > sensitized paper high. Shifts in printing colours are easily > made with > chemicals. (I have never used Mike ware's formulations though) > I would > recommend using Platinum 6 as a contrast agent for DOP. It can > work very > well. Dichromate is very effective in POP but also affects > printing colour. > > Regards, > > Witho > > -----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- > Van: Sandy King [mailto:sanking@clemson.edu] > Verzonden: vrijdag 10 november 2006 16:58 > Aan: alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca > Onderwerp: Re: Mike Ware's POP Pt./Pd. Pt > > Cost wise I don't think you will find a > significant difference between traditional DOP > Pt./Pd. with ferric oxalate and POP Pt./Pd with > ferric ammonium oxalate with either the Ware > method or Ziatype. FAO costs a lot less than FO, > but in the larger scheme the paper and metal > salts represent more than 90% of the total cost > so if the goal is to save money the best method > is to buy the metal salts and paper in volume. > > To this point I have used primarily traditional > DOP Pt./Pd. with the dichromate system of > contrast control, though I did experiment with > Ziatype in the past, and in the last several days > I have made some very nice prints with the Ware > method. For the most part, DOP Pt./Pd. has proven > trouble free, but getting the FO solution right > is very important, which can be complicated by > the fact that FO is an ill-defined substance and > supplies can and do vary. The advantages of FAO > are that it is less expensive, better defined, > and goes into solution much easier than FO. > > I really don't know which method would be better > for a beginner. I tend to think that POP Pt./Pd. > might be slightly easier, but control of humidity > is more important than with DOP Pt./Pd. since it > affects both color and printing speed. > > If cost is a major issue you might consider > making kallitypes and toning them with palladium > or platinum. The end result if almost identical, > in that in both cases you have a print that is > primarily made up of metallic palladium or > platinum. Silver nitrate is a lot less expensive > than palladium or platinum, and you don't waste > the palladium except on images that are good. > However, making good kallitypes also requires a > lot of attention to detail. > > Sandy King > > > > > > > At 11:06 AM -0500 11/9/06, Jordan Wosnick wrote: > >For someone beginning Pt/Pd printing (but with > >experience doing Vandykes and cyanotypes), would > >you all recommend the Mike Ware (ammonium > >ferrioxalate) method or the "traditional" > >(ferric oxalate) method? Is Ware's method > >cheaper than the "traditional" method? > > > >Thanks > > > >Loris Medici wrote: > >>And I'd say we should thank Mike Ware, Pradip Malde, Dick > Sullivan and > >>Carl Weese (and other persons involved - not forgetting the > early > >>pioneers) for their efforts in devising workable, beatiful > methods of > >>POP Pt/Pd printing using AFO sensitizer and sharing the > information > >>freely without any commercial intention. > >> > >>Thank you! (Bowing) > >> > >>Best regards, > >>Loris. > >> > >>-----Original Message----- > >>From: Sandy King [mailto:sanking@clemson.edu] > >>Sent: 09 Kasžm 2006 Pers¸embe 03:22 > >>To: alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca > >>Subject: Mike Ware's POP Pt./Pd. Pt > >> > >>... > >> > >>In any event, I thank Loris Medici for putting me on the > potential > >>advantages of FAO. Lots of potential here I believe. > >>... > >> > > > >-- > > > > > >Jordan Wosnick > >jwosnick@fastmail.fm > >
|