U of S | Mailing List Archive | alt-photo-process-l | RE: "New" Paper for Pt/Pd (and other iron processes, too)

RE: "New" Paper for Pt/Pd (and other iron processes, too)

What I meant by hard to beat is the consistency of DOP, i.e. the capability of making multiple prints, all with the same density and color, without worrying about changes in exposure.

FAO with the ammonium salt gives beautiful chocolate colors, if printing at low humidity. But you need some type of contrast control if working with negatives of DR of 1.8 or so intended for DOP palladium. You can actually get it by adding a few drops of dichromate to the sensitizer, as you do with ziatype. There is no down side to this as far as I can see, and the ability to control contrast this way makes the Ware/Malde process quite flexible.

FAO with the lithium salt (ziatype) also works well, though I have only made a few prints with it. But for persons who like nice neutral black prints this is the way to go with palladium.

But printing with Pt./Pd. drives me crazy at times. The prints always have this glorious look when they are washing, and when you hang them up to dry. Then you come back the next morning when they are dry and they look dull. By contrast, carbon prints improve in look as they dry. I do find that a couple of coats of some kind of clear gloss lacquer or varnish recovers some of the wet look, but not all of it.


At 8:46 AM +0200 11/29/06, Loris Medici wrote:
Thanks Sandy,

I'm sure you'll share your experience & views regarding both Ware-Malde
(NH4) and Zia (Li) systems in a detailed manner (as you always do) -
thanks in advance! (What exactly you find "hard to beat" in the DOP


-----Original Message-----
From: Sandy King [mailto:sanking@clemson.edu]
Sent: 29 Kasěm 2006 «arsłamba 08:37
To: alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca
Subject: RE: "New" Paper for Pt/Pd (and other iron processes, too)

Hi Loris,

Yes, it is from a digital negative. The original
was a 7X17" in-camera negative.

The image file, at least on my monitor, shows
more contrast than the actual print. The file was
also greatly reduced in resolution for uploading
to the LF site.

This is a DOP palladium print. I am going to do
it again with the Ware/Malde and Ziatype POP to
compare look. But it will be hard to beat the DOP
print. But I am  getting great Dmax with the
lithium palladium salt so we shall see.


At 8:14 AM +0200 11/29/06, Loris Medici wrote:
The print looks nice! Is it from a digital negative? If that's not
asking too much, can you please provide a crop of the print (showing
tonality from shadows to the highlights) at 360dpi resolution 100% size

(to let us see the paper texture)? A last question about the print: is
it DOP or POP?