Re: Kallitypes - Do I want to try it ?

McFarland,Doug D (Doug_D_McFarland@xn.xerox.com)
Thu, 24 Oct 1996 04:20:53 PDT

> 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.

Dick Stevens suggest toning can unify the color over many prints and perhaps
toning with Selenium, Gold or other POP toners would solve the permanence
problem you mention below.

> 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

I'm well aware of this, and one reason I'm on this list. However I wasn't
aware that the Kallitype was "as good" in image quality as a platinum
print. I figured it may be good but not that good.

> 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.

And would toning help to solve this problem (as Dick Stevens suggest ?)

> 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.

I was considering Photographers Formulary as a kit, which I presume is K II.

Where would I find Mike Ware' Argyrotype Kit ?

Thanks for your response -

Doug