[alt-photo] Re: Flatter than pure palladium?

[Judy Seigel]

On Wed, 6 Oct 2010, Jon Reid wrote:

> @ Judy. I have used flashing for enlarged silver printing before but didn't
> know it was also viable for platinum printing. I am imagining however that
> this might result in lowering the tone of the billboard area to below pure
> white but not necessarily resulting in that area displaying detail. Would
> this be the case? The billboard is covered in vertical ribs as seen at
> right.

Truth to tell, as far as I can recall, I've done probably 5 platinum 
prints in my life... and those some 20 or more years ago.  (I'm squeamish 
about using a medium that's worth more than I am.) But I've done most 
others, and can't think of any reason a light-sensitive emulsion that can 
take various levels of exposure wouldn't permit flashing -- assuming it's 
carefully done. (If the shapes are intricate, it can be helpful to use a 
flashing mask... which IME works best if NOT put down directly on the 
paper -- which can leave a sharp edge.)

I suppose some emulsions and conditions could require a specific exposure, 
in which case "flashing" might not work. Maybe some proprietary processes, 
or "kits" that come pre-measured, might depend on exact exposures (as 
measured by instruments of the US atomic energy commission)... but that 
would probably require electric current controlled more precisely than our 
dear Con Ed of NYC provides anyway...

Still, the beauty of test strips is that they usually tell you SOMETHING, 
with a relatively small investment of cash and ego, even if they don't 
"come out."

PS. I used to tone Vandyke prints with a platinum toner...  intended to
give the permanence of platinum without the cost -- since only the 
successes got toned & the toner was more dilute than the emulsion. But I'm 
not sure anyway that "archivality" could be measured in less than one or 
two hundred years (at least not by me), so who knows?

J.