This message bounced. It is originally from Richard Sullivan
(richsul@roadrunner.com), so if you wish to reply privately, send it his
way (not mine).
------------------------<included message follows>----------------------
> From: Richard Sullivan <richsul@roadrunner.com>
> Date: Sun, 26 May 1996 01:19:08 -0600
> Subject: Your opinion please
I have developed a method for making a different kind of pre coated
paper and am in the very early stages of deciding whether or not to
market it or not.
Here is how it works. The paper itself does not contain any of the metal
salts, just the iron component. The paper is exposed in the normal
manner. The print is then developed by spreading on a glycerine
compound containing the metal salts. The print is then run through a
bath of Tween and then washed face down in water. The coating compound
used for development quickly turns black, thus the Tween bath keeps it
from staining the paper. The amount of metal needed appears to be
slightly less than that used for traditional printing. Contrast can be
controlled by adding a oxidizer to the coating. For small prints the
developer can be spread with a glass rod. For some reason that I have
yet to understand it appears to be far more tolerant of paper properties
than the traditional process
I've done enough experimentation to convince myself that the process is
feasible but it still needs some fine tuning. Like they say on Everest,
that last mile is a dilly.
The obvious advantage is that coating the paper with the iron compound
alone reduces manufacturing costs and makes the coating job far easier.
Humidity appears not to be a problem as the paper can be dried if it
gets damp as no development (fogging) takes place. Another big advantage
is that the end user can control the exact mix of metals by mixing
portions of two developing compounds, for instance 50-50 pt/pd. Silver
can also be used but not in combination with pt or pd because of the
chloride problem though there may possibly be a workaround. Since
producing an iron coated paper (with other magical ingredients) would be
quite inexpensive compared to pt or pd, it would be economically
feasible to produce a variety of surface, weights, and tints.
One disadvantage is the development process provides you momentarily
with a print slimy with yukky black stuff. I haven't quite engineered
how the development work station should be set up. Other than that, this
seems to offer quite a few advantages over the conventional precoated
paper.
Personally I've always had my druthers about preoated paper. I can see
their advantages for commercial applications such as big name photogs
having platinum printed for them by other people, but then most of them
opt for hand coating by printers like Axon, Rudiak, Henningsten, Lopes
and others. I like the personal involvement that the alt-processes
provide me so it seems to me if you are going to go this route, you
should opt for maximum involvement. It's sort of like climbing Everest
and going the last mile in a helicopter. (Yeah I know, choppers can't go
that high, but if they could.) However, if there is market for paper
like this, I might like a share of it.
Any comments, ideas, tips, etc are welcome. I'm still a long ways off on
this and far from committed.
~
~
Dick Sullivan
Bostick & Sullivan
Santa Fe, New mexico