> I use a glass rod to coat my 7x17 prints. This works very well for
> me. I've never printed larger than that, but I don't see why it
> wouldn't work for larger prints as well. I have a friend that has
> used glass rods for much larger prints.
Actually, I have used the glass rod successfully in coating for
prints up to 7x15 (3 7x5s edge to edge). An example can be viewed at
http://www.public.asu.edu/~anarsynd/beyond/iliamna.html
However, when attempting to coat larger than this I began having
problems due to the amount of liquid required and the proportion of
height to width of the area to be coated. Using a brush there is no
problem coating for 7x30 (6 7x5s), 8x30 (3 8x10s), or 10x24 (3 10x8s).
> Contrary to Terry's experience, I find that I use much less
> sensitizer with a glass rod than when I used a brush (yes, I
> pre-wetted the brush, etc, etc...). When I am done coating, the
> glass rod is nearly dry and there is no buildup of residual
> sensitizer to be "blotted away" along the edges of the coated area.
I think that as size of area being coated increases, the waste factor
decreases since a brush will absorb only so much liquid. A corollary
of the law of diminishing returns perhaps.
I agree that there should be no need for blotting and no residue if
the right amount of solution is used based on the absorbency of the
paper and the size of the area being coated.
Neither method is superior to the other in all situations. I will
continue to use both.
Keith
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Keith Schreiber
Rights and Reproductions
Center for Creative Photography
University of Arizona
Tucson, Arizona 85721
Fon: 520-621-7968
Fax: 520-621-9444
Email: keith@ccp.arizona.edu
WWW: http://www.ccp.arizona.edu/ccp.html
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~