[alt-photo] Re: Subject: Re: paper and cyanotype

[Doug Taylor]

I agree Chris, the cyans always look rough on FA. I recently bought  
COT320 and some platine which I'll try with the Ware formula. I really  
like the deep blue color.

I have not tried citric with the traditional formula.

Good luck with your paper testing!

Doug

On Feb 25, 2012, at 10:43 AM, Christina Anderson wrote:

> Thanks, Doug. I will definitely do the citric acid thing because of  
> how alkaline that paper is. I do use FAEW, of course, all the time  
> with the traditional formula for gumovers (and lengthy exposures for  
> traditional at that)  but even then the cyanotype is fairly  
> "unhappy." It never "sings" on that paper.
>
> Have you ever tried adding citric to the traditional formula?
>
> Can't wait to get a "speed chart" going of traditional on all these  
> various papers. That is what surprised me most about Buxton was an  
> exposure time of 4 minutes. I could even expose 1/3 stop less if I  
> wanted.
> Chris
>
> Christina Z. Anderson
> christinaZanderson.com
>
> On Feb 23, 2012, at 3:06 PM, Doug Taylor wrote:
>
>> Hi Chris,
>>
>> I used the Ware Cyan a couple months ago on FAEW and also resulted  
>> in a brown stain. I added a couple drops of 12% citric acid to the  
>> Ware sensitizer, enough for an 8x10 print, in a small glass  
>> container and swirled together. Dumped on paper and coated. After  
>> exposure, I placed the print in a tray of 1% citric acid for 1  
>> minute, then into a wash, and the stain is completely gone. Don't  
>> know if the paper will stay cleared but works in the near term and  
>> fairly easy.
>>
>> Cheers, Doug
>>
>>
>> On Feb 22, 2012, at 10:04 AM, Christina Anderson wrote:
>>
>>> Very fascinating, Greg (and Loris). So you all expose bone dry.  
>>> That would save me tons of time here in 15%-humidity-land. My  
>>> guess is speed would decrease.
>>>
>>> I am through with the first test, cyano and Buxton. Results are  
>>> interesting. Exposure UVBL under Pictorico is 4mn 1:1 and 2.5mn  
>>> Ware's, only a 2/3 stop difference on this paper.
>>>
>>> Ware's is a more navy/less turquoise blue with a slightly deeper  
>>> dMax (don't have a densitometer but desaturated and blur/averaged  
>>> it measures 93 with the eyedropper tool as opposed to 104 for  
>>> Traditional).
>>>
>>> Ware's is a b--ch to clear, and really requires citric acid to get  
>>> the yellow out (or an hour or more soak time) on this paper. With  
>>> my water, of course.
>>>
>>> Ware's however is a bit snappier in the midtones--may be my  
>>> coating technique, contact in the printing frame (more doubtful  
>>> but possible), or, in fact, that Ware's soaks into the paper more  
>>> easily which it does. Not much problem with pooling. This is a  
>>> plus, as is one-solution. But in the archives I read of a couple  
>>> people keeping A and B mixed and using it up to a month or more.
>>>
>>> Curve for both is almost the same which did surprise me.
>>>
>>> So clearing is the number one complaint about Ware's on this  
>>> paper--for me.
>>>
>>> Now onto Platine and Masa. Really I should do an FAEW next because  
>>> that is a hard paper for cyano.
>>>
>>> It's amazing to go back and test cyano after a decade of alt  
>>> practice. I mean, I've done curves for cyano with multiple  
>>> different printers over the years, but I have not done an apple to  
>>> apple paper comparison, as much as one can make a paper apple to  
>>> apple. I've just stuck with a few papers (Platine, FAEW, BFK,  
>>> Weston, Cover).
>>> Chris
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Christina Z. Anderson
>>> christinaZanderson.com
>>>
>>> On Feb 21, 2012, at 9:20 PM, Greg Franco wrote:
>>>
>>>> I have also found it easier to get consistent results by exposing  
>>>> bone dry and taking the humidity out of the equation for the most  
>>>> part.  I tested 7 or 8 papers last summer and got my best results  
>>>> using classic formula 1:1 on Arches 140 lbs. hot press watercolor  
>>>> paper developed in .20 % HCL... deeper blues and longer scale  
>>>> than I was able to get on Platine or Cot 320.  The exposure times  
>>>> using HCL development decreased dramatically compared to water  
>>>> development... 120 units on my Nuarc 26-1k(about 4 minutes),  
>>>> whereas it takes 180 units for platinum/palladium.
>>>>
>>>> Greg Franco
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> I can imagine / empathize with your frustration! Only after days of
>>>> struggle (in 2003) I remembered reading Christopher James'
>>>> recommendation / method of exposing bone dry paper (done  
>>>> thoroughly,
>>>> with a hairdryer set to the max. temperature), and that saved my  
>>>> life
>>>> - what a relief! Post humidification still stays as a viable
>>>> (optional) method; one may get few more steps in the highlights...
>>>>
>>>> Very interesting indeed (< 2 mins. exposure), that's in the park of
>>>> gum exposures! Never experienced anything like this. Unfortunately
>>>> Buxton and the other / new Herschel paper are both out of my  
>>>> scope...
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Loris.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Alt-photo-process-list | http://altphotolist.org/listinfo
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Alt-photo-process-list | http://altphotolist.org/listinfo
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Alt-photo-process-list | http://altphotolist.org/listinfo
>
> _______________________________________________
> Alt-photo-process-list | http://altphotolist.org/listinfo