U of S | Mailing List Archive | alt-photo-process-l | RE: solarized gums?

RE: solarized gums?



This is documented in list archives. Follow this link:

http://www.usask.ca/lists/alt-photo-process/2005/dec05/0473.htm

My take was: You need some minimal exposure (that will not cause
considerable fog/image) in the highlights. If not, dissolved pigment
will adhere to non-exposed areas causing this effect. I experienced the
same while exposing a step tablet: I got prefect white starting from
step 16 ending at step 18, then slight pigment stain starting from 19
ending at 31 (too much density).

Probably the highlights in your negative were way too dense... Use a
negative density (color) that merely / barely gives you white on the
print.

Regards,
Loris.

-----Original Message-----
From: ilana [mailto:ilanamahala@adelphia.net] 
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2007 7:47 PM
To: alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca
Subject: solarized gums?


Hello Friends,
With all of your added input I am getting the handle on things--at least
understanding how each element reacts and how to manipulate it to my
needs.

Something weird is happening: I am getting highlights that look
solarized. The edges are white and the insides are dark. However, other
details in the print are coming through, and appear as they should be.
At first I thought my negative was printing negative. It has happened
with two negatives: 1) which had very dark areas [strong highlights] and
2) a test print I'm doing where I having layered two exact copies of a
negative onto one another and exposed it together [all digital, 300 dpi,
negative, with adjusted levels]

I realized it could be 100 million things, however, I'd like to see if
my thought are along the right path: The negative is too dense now and
the parts that should clear are not, because they have not received
enough light. Solutions: 1) use only one layer of neg 2)increase
exposure, less dichromate, and less pigment, 3)??

Has anyone else ever had this happen?

Thanks,
ilana