<< What I would like to know is will I get better image quality (longer scale
?)
with Kallitype (assuming I could "master" the process) over my current
traditional Silver emulsion ? I've read that the P/P process has a longer
scale and "depth", but what about Kallitype ? >>
The goal of many of the earlier workers with Kallitype was to produce results
which are indistinguishable from platinum prints - and my experience is that
you can do this, although possibly with less control over image colour. There
is considerable discussion in various places about the aesthetics of platinum,
so you should be able to refer to this - and also to the many examples of
platinum prints in museum etc collections. Some of these may actually be
kallitypes - we had a little speculation here a while back that kallitypes
that had not faded were possibly identified and traded as platinum prints.
The main problem with the kallitype is with fading - a major cause appears to
be iron compounds left in the print, and you are advised to use methods that
avoid alkaline development. There are various formulas around - and no doubt
some pointers to the in the archive - both ancient and modern.
One major advantage with alt processes is that you can choose the paper
surface. Older kallitype formulae seem to me to be less particular about the
paper than the excellent modern variant of the process, Mike Ware' Argyrotype.
This is marketed as a kit by the way which would serve as a very easy
introduction to the area.
Peter Marshall
On Fixing Shadows, Dragonfire and elsewhere:
http://faraday.clas.virginia.edu/~ds8s/
Family Pictures & Gay Pride: http://www.dragonfire.net/~gallery/
and: http://www.speltlib.demon.co.uk/