> Judy is right. Lead acetate toner works well for me translating the
> prussian blue into a deep colbalt blue. I am using a different cyanotype
Incidentally, the article on making lamp shades in cyanotype I just
quoted gives a 25% lead acetate solution for toning cyanotype violet.
Isn't that a lot of lead acetate?
> formula which I like better because it produces less bleeding and whiter
> whites. I think I am going to have to make some more slides to send to
> Judy in order to convience her of this. New Yorkers are naturally hard
> to convince. ;-)
Bob that's absolutely untrue and unfair. The point you're missing is that
we New Yorker's don't let our cyanotypes "bleed" in the first place, no
bleeding hearts, no bleeding cyanotypes, no bleeding gum bichromates
either in the Big Apple. (We think it's the *soft* New York water, or
maybe our soft NY hearts.)
However, on the topic of gum bichromate with the enlarger, it occurs to me
after all this discussion that maybe better not. I mean shouldn't there
be some hurdle for this wonderful process? So make a big negative you
lazy swine, this is *not* polaroid transfer! Besides which, there's much
to be said for working up in the studio, where at this moment there is a
view of spreading backyard cherry tree in full riotous exalted exuberant
unprecedented fulminating transcendent bloom, rather than in dark cellar
where the only view is the ceiling disintegrating into a pile of asbestos
powder, sand and rust.
Cheers (cough, cough)
Judy