RE: Réf. : Re: Réf. : RE: Réf. : Sury
I was (still am) not very clear either; but Judy is sending me the article. Then I will put it on a web site. Hopefully that will make things clear. Dave > -----Original Message----- > From: Katharine Thayer [mailto:kthayer@pacifier.com] > Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2008 9:31 PM > To: alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca > Subject: Re: Réf. : Re: Réf. : RE: Réf. : Sury > > Okay, so the misperception was about the names; the patent > copies on your website is in fact the same patent that is > used to make the > pictures shown, and the process is called the Sury Color Process. > Thanks for clearing up the confusion. > > I was apparently mistaking the patent Richard described with > the patent someone else (Dave? Judy?) described, for a color > process that seemed possibly to resemble a resinotype. > Katharine > > > > > On Jan 2, 2008, at 11:12 AM, Philippe Berger wrote: > > > Katharine, > > > > which I gather from Richard's description uses three color > separation > > negatives, and a colloid over cyanotype mixed- process for > the three > > color printings > > > > This is a other patent of Joseph Sury in 1908 I am also > this patent > > (10 pages) > > > > ***** > > What confuses me is that the pictures show the temporary > blue pigment > > being removed by acid; is that also a feature of the > resinotype Sury > > Color Process? Or is it that Phillipe's process isn't a direct > > translation of either of Sury's patents but his own process > that sort > > of takes from both? Or something else, like the names of the > > processes have been mixed up or something. > > By the way, if anyone's interested in trying this (the method > > described in the patent on the website), sodium aluminum > > sulfosilicate is ultramarine blue. > > > > This is the patent of the Color process of 1924, do you see on my > > Website See the 3 picture on my web site with a demonstration > > 1 Blue picture > > 2.The picture without the blue > > 3. Add the dry pigment > > > > Are you see the difference > > > > Philippe > > > > > > > > -------Message original------- > > > > De : Katharine Thayer > > Date : 01/02/08 19:52:55 > > A : alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca > > Sujet : Re: Réf. : RE: Réf. : Sury > > > > I think I need some clarification. My understanding, > reading through > > this thread, is that the pictures on Philippe's website, both from > > Sury and from Phillipe, are made from the process called the Sury > > Color Process, which I gather from Richard's description uses three > > color separation negatives, and a colloid over cyanotype mixed- > > process for the three color printings. > > > > But the patent that Phillipe so thoughtfully put on the > website for us > > to read, is a patent for a different process involving a prepared > > paper coated with a colloid mixed with a temporary blue pigment. A > > dichromate solution is coated over the paper to sensitize > it and the > > paper is exposed, developed and dried, then the blue pigment is > > removed by putting the paper in hydrochloric acid, which makes the > > dried colloid receptive to powdered pigment. > > > > What confuses me is that the pictures show the temporary > blue pigment > > being removed by acid; is that also a feature of the > resinotype Sury > > Color Process? Or is it that Phillipe's process isn't a direct > > translation of either of Sury's patents but his own process > that sort > > of takes from both? Or something else, like the names of the > > processes have been mixed up or something. > > > > By the way, if anyone's interested in trying this (the method > > described in the patent on the website), sodium aluminum > > sulfosilicate is ultramarine blue. > > > > Katharine > > > > On Dec 31, 2007, at 9:45 PM, Richard Knoppow wrote: > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Philippe Berger" > > > <mineurdecharbon@skynet.be> > > > To: <alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca> > > > Sent: Sunday, December 30, 2007 1:15 PM > > > Subject: Réf. : RE: Réf. : Sury > > > > > > > > > Marek, > > > > > > The sury color is not a real tricolor, the sury color is > different > > > of a carbon Black The Sury Color is only a Sury Color, a > process of > > > Joseph Sury of > > 1924 > > > > > > Philippe > > > > > > > > > I was not able to find a Sury patent dated 1924 but found an > > > earlier one as noted in a previous post. The earlier patent is for > > > three-color printing from color separation negatives using a > > > combination of cyanotype for the blue image and some sort > of resin, > > > gum or something else not specified, for the other two > colors. Sury > > > distinguishes this method from an "assembled" method such > as three- > > > color carbon. This may not be the method being described here. > > > The sample on your web site is quite interesting. I > downloaded it > > > and, out of curiosity, manipulated it in Photoshop using the auto > > > level or the auto-color commands. The results are about the same > > > and quite interesting because they get rid of the yellow overall > > > cast and bring out a great deal of subtle color which the overall > > > color suppresses. I wonder what it was intended to look like. > > > I agree with Judy that it is reminscent of a style > popular in the > > > 1920's but, to my eye, looks much like a good pencil portrait. The > > > pose and lighting are far better than most of the "pictorialist" > > > stuff from that period. It is in fact a beautiful portrait of a > > > quite beautiful girl and quite fascinating regardless of what > > > process it may have been made with. > > > > > > --- > > > Richard Knoppow > > > Los Angeles, CA, USA > > > dickburk@ix.netcom.com > > > > > > > > > __________ Information NOD32 2760 (20080102) __________ > > > > Ce message a ete verifie par NOD32 Antivirus System. > > http://www.nod32.com > > > > > > <1D7675F9-DC23-4B36-BA38-6945C86A8C28> > > >
|