I think this raises an important point. The processes dealt with here are a
fairly disparate collection and this is one problem with trying to find an
overall name for them.
However one thing we can all try to avoid is the unnecessary proliferation of
names for minor variations in existing processes. If we are worried about the
picture-buying public understanding what we are doing then we should try for
the minimum number of categories. I've always tried to do this (and sometimes
been criticised for it) by calling, for example ALL processes based on the
light sensitivity of iron compounds followed by a reaction with silver ions
'kallitypes'.
Similarly all processes based on the hardening of colloids using dichromate as
the light sensitive material would be called 'gum bichromate' jseigel@panix.com (no 'gloy
bichromate' process etc!)
Of course when talking amongst ourselves we will continue to want to
distinguish the minor variations, and some of the other names may continue to
have a use in this context.
There will still remain some processes that don't fit into a neat scheme. The
Satista recipe I posted the other day is one - which I would probably call in
exhibitions a 'silver-platinum print.'
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/
>
> Message text written by Judy Seigel
> >
> Actually, a name already exists for substituting silver for platinum in
> the classic platinum recipe -- it's called "kallitype." <
>
> Although there is a certain 'tongue in cheek' about this, Judy's comment is
> fair enough if we are to call all iron/silver processes kallitype,
> including VDB. Which is what I prefer to do.
>
>
> Terry
----------