U of S | Mailing List Archive | alt-photo-process-l | RE: pyro and cyano

RE: pyro and cyano

	I think the archival issue is more due to the youth of photography
compared to other artistic media, not insecurity about whether or not it IS
an art medium.  Many photos have faded since invention in the 1830s.  But
you have drawings and paintings in excellent condition after at least 600
years and more and even older frescoes. 

-----Original Message-----
From: Judy Seigel [mailto:jseigel@panix.com] 
Sent: Saturday, April 11, 2009 12:16 AM
To: alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca
Subject: Re: pyro and cyano

On Fri, 10 Apr 2009, Christina Z. Anderson wrote:

> Bob,
> I quit using the hydrogen peroxide because it was questioned to perhaps 
> compromise the archivalness of the paper and it was unnecessary because
> print would eventually get to that dark blue anyway, PLUS it seemed to
> the print a bit, though this latter is only subjective to me and another 
> person or so.

I know "nature" isn't logical, but it seems to me that if the print is 
well rinsed, a peroxide bath won't be harmful. As for total depth of blue 
(if that's what you're after... so OK, like they say, "it's a free 
country"), we tested that in my "non-silver" class years ago. (Probably 
the smartest thing I did in teaching was assign a variables test for each 
half of the semester -- I got a lot of info that way.) Testing with 2 
identical prints, or tearing one print in half, we found no difference 
with peroxide, at least by the end of the semester. And it figures not -- 
rinsed is rinsed.

I'm reminded however that the first few times we added peroxide to a 
cyanotype, the class was so thrilled (the effect, especially if you're not 
familiar with it, is stunning) I'd have hated to cut that out.  And since 
students often were making their prints on surfaces like T-shirts, paper 
bags, a piece of paper they'd picked up in an East Village gutter, etc., 
fine points about "archival" were often moot. (I've also said before & say 
again, that I was an art student for a lot of years before I was a photo 
student, and "archival" was rarely mentioned. My theory is that was 
because we *knew* art was art. Photographers may, um, excuse me, be so 
concerned about "archival" because.... um, they're still not sure about
"art" status?)

However, speaking of cyanotype as medium, I've never found it other than 
generous and forgiving, assuming you're in a blue mood. Of course that may 
have been because my own style is not to set values in advance (I never 
got whitest white or darkest dark on a print in my life as far as I'm 
aware... In fact when I first read that in an early text, I shrugged it 
off. It wasn't because I knew better (tho I feel like I do now), or it 
seemed like too much trouble, it was because it seemed so arbitrary and 
irrelevant, I lost faith. (Who made up that rule anyway?  Ansel Adams???)

As for photo books-- I want a satisfactory, if possible elegaic experience 
from a book of pictures. That seems more important, given the givens, than 
its absolute truth to the original... which may not translate well in a 
different medium (at least not at a price you could pay and get another 
book the next year). Even at their best, the two media are different 
media. Expecting them to match precisely may compromise both.

(Tho I guess if you're planning to copy the printing method, it could be 
important to see the work precisely -- but then the effect might be so 
leaden you wouldn't want to...)

> BUT this is my question--does the hydrogen peroxided print actually get 
> darker blue than one that oxidizes over several days?  So if it gets
> there would be a benefit to it.  I have not tested this.

No, not in the aforementioned tests, amyway. Oxidised by bubbles of oxygen 
from a bottle, or in the air, wasn't, at least in NY/Brooklyn temperature, 
humidity, water, pollution, ambience, an issue.

> And who the hell cares about the archivalness of my prints--like I'm going
> be famous one day????

That's unknown either way, but you could be more famous for drecking them 
up, which at least at this moment is cooler.

> Let me tell you, people complain about gum being fickle, I find personally
> my practice cyanotype the most fickle process of all.  I can only chalk it
> to the fact that humidity and coating plays a way greater part in that 
> process than people imagine.

Or it could be because cyano doesn't invite afterwork, fixing, re-coating, 
etc., as some do.


__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
database 4001 (20090411) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.