U of S | Mailing List Archive | alt-photo-process-l | Re: Artistico Unsized?

Re: Artistico Unsized?

  • To: alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca
  • Subject: Re: Artistico Unsized?
  • From: Katharine Thayer <kthayer@pacifier.com>
  • Date: Sat, 01 Sep 2007 07:47:47 -0700
  • Comments: "alt-photo-process mailing list"
  • In-reply-to: <034701c7ea0a$655facd0$ce02500a@altinyildiz.boyner>
  • List-id: alt-photo-process mailing list <alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca>
  • References: <034701c7ea0a$655facd0$ce02500a@altinyildiz.boyner>
  • Reply-to: alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca

On Aug 29, 2007, at 12:01 AM, Loris Medici wrote:

FWIW, Masa isn't slower than Artistico. With my lightsource (a bank of
UVBL tubes) the exposure times are exactly the same (with similar
results). Can't speak for Arches since I haven't used it before

This makes some sense, I think, if Artistico Extra White prints about the same as the Traditional White, because a month ago or so I sized up a small number of Artistico Extra White that I had ordered several years ago and never used for actual prints because I don't care for the surface texture, but I figured it would do to run tests on, as a way of getting it out of the drawer without actually throwing it away.

I was suprised how much slower it was than my usual Arches bright white; as I recall it was on the order of 5-6 minutes for test strips that would take 2 minutes on Arches, at the same humidity and similar coating mix. This is with my EBV photoflood bulb, of course.