Re: Paper and platinum

Peter Marshall (petermarshall@cix.compulink.co.uk)
Wed, 22 May 96 18:01 BST-1

In-Reply-To: <960522005544_118556700@emout10.mail.aol.com>

I reviewed Palladio paper for the British Journal of Photography a few years
ago. Carefully following the instructions I was able to get first class
results - which I could compare not only with my own platinum work but with
that of other people in the UK I had seen - including several on this list,
and historical work. If your students haven't either the quality of the
material has slipped since I tested it or you can put it down to the fact
they are students. I certainly wouldn't dismiss Ilford Multigrade because of
the often dismal results my students get with it!

My conclusion was that the results were at least as good as most of the hand
coated prints. The peroxide method of contrast control also seemed to give
the printer a slight edge in the precise tuning of negative to print,
without the problems I had encountered using chlorate with hand coated
solutions.

The only way I could get better results from hand coating was by double
coating. The only drawback I saw with the machine coated product was that it
was only available on one slightly anonymous paper surface.

Most of the classic platinum printers whose work I admire did of course rely
on machine coated paper, notably Frederick Evans. (Fortunately there are a
few of his prints left in the UK!)

Peter Marshall

Family Album/Gay Pride - http://www.dragonfire.net/~gallery/index.html
Also on Fixing Shadows: ----------- http://fermi.clas.virginia.edu/~ds8s
Future Press and elsewhere... E-Mail: petermarshall@cix.compulink.co.uk