Re: lumenprints not chromo?
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: Re: lumenprints not chromo?
- From: Gregg Kemp <email@example.com>
- Date: Wed, 06 May 2009 17:44:45 -0400
- Comments: "alt-photo-process mailing list"
- Delivered-to: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com;s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:from:to:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:subject:x-priority:date:references:x-mailer;bh=2FesWjr/Sy93GTrMWPE42JcZ0tNiHZpy5YbepzulALQ=;b=Nq/w5MAZdHWsXMwt7auvniSilDq3jCLCp2x/hdC6vyi/03MCDQDKdavWmPYsb1q40ry9VbzT8MBzlyDIDg1VuK3wKgg3WptHOrQ3Hmb8a6Q/PJ7mWCjcqp7DIGkgCWSfvcsPbfscTrrX66wAai7iy9KavJP1WYmxSDv8D1Y1NXM=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma;h=message-id:from:to:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:subject:x-priority:date:references:x-mailer;b=C6OUjCHAszPYY9A3uV3hmkzwlFJpsC+EEVUkMWUpytT4gtZz3YgWXXpqRfYAr0QZdx6iDWh5y8dYJEPPOFod3cYELBG5Uy6d2poEr480QJXty+6UFOI/BUdT08vFnhFNIz8NfPm+1ngP6OZ1839XxmTbAiEw13IkvYPVMP7uG1U=
- In-reply-to: <3CC081475271466B859A44F98BC97DB7@DC5YX7B1>
- List-id: alt-photo-process mailing list <email@example.com>
- References: <B2EA29430BC68647B9F00ECF09BAD020E129D62B8D@exchsrv02.barrynet.barry.edu><3CC081475271466B859A44F98BC97DB7@DC5YX7B1>
- Reply-to: firstname.lastname@example.org
My attempts at using fixer with similar multi-day pinhole exposures
resulted in the image pretty much disappearing off the paper. I used
Arista fixer at normal strength and diluted as much as 1:20, but
always lost most of the image. Perhaps a different fixer would work
I also had problems scanning at first, but that may just be my scanner
(an Epson 3200). I found that if I scanned a 5x7 negative at more than
600 dpi, the scanner would pause during the scan. And the scan would
show a slight darkening after the pause. So I now scan at 600 dpi.
But perhaps a scanner with more memory or more memory on my computer
would not do this. My suggestion is to scan a plain piece of paper at
the resolution you plan to use before scanning the actual negative,
just to be safe. I also put a piece of black felt behind the negative
before scanning, in hopes of keeping down the amount of light bouncing
around - just superstition perhaps.
Chris - I looked for the student work on your website that you
mentioned, but didn't find it. Would you please post the URL?
On May 6, 2009, at 3:03 PM, Christina Z. Anderson wrote:
I always fix mine. There is a noticeable loss of density and color
shift in the fix. I also know that Jerry Burchfield who does all
those Amazon exposures brings all images back in a black plastic bag
to the States and fixes at one time. Unless he has changed his
process in the last couple years, all of his previous lumenprints
were fixed and I have never heard of not fixing before...however,
the idea to scan before fixing is a great one and then you get a two-
My prints do not fade once fixed and archivally washed and treated
as if a normal BW print. You can see student examples on my website,
and see how brilliant they are--with fixing.
Re: scanning. I would find it shocking that a 90 day pinhole
exposure lumenprint (chromo is a different process entirely because
it uses darkroom chemistry, developer, activator, stabilizer) that
will never touch the developer but go straight into the fix, would
be affected by a one minute scan.
You will also notice a distinct color shift when dry prints are
rewetted. But then it reverts again when dry.
Christina Z. Anderson
----- Original Message ----- From: "Weber, Scott B" <email@example.com
Sent: Wednesday, May 06, 2009 12:06 PM
Just completed a 90 day pinhole exposure on gelatin silver paper.
Chromoscedasic print. The image looks good, but do I fix this?
Maybe some thiosulfate? Or should I leave it? My plan is to scan
it but will the light in the scanner affect the image?
Scott B. Weber
Associate Professor of Photography
Department of Fine Arts
Miami Shores, Florida
305 899 4922