Re: I feel so lonely!!!!......

Judy Seigel ()
Tue, 14 January 1997 4:59 PM

On Wed, 15 Jan 1997, Carlos Gasparinho wrote:

> My message asking for people using kallitypes as their number 1 printing process, to contact me received no answers (so far).
>
> Am I the only one?

If you just keep posting, Carlos, I don't think you'll be the only one for
long. I used to do kallitype and found it very beautiful, but a barrage
of negative commentary about it on this list -- that it was very *un*
archival-- made me feel it was best given up, though that wasn't the
reason I left, which was, rather, the limitless and irresistable charms of
gum bichromate. (The vaudeville line was: "I love my wife, but Oh you
kid!)

But let me run past you the reasons why I preferred kallitype to VDB and
see if you agree: more contrast control, also more variation of color
or color control, with kallitype moving readily into blacks, while VDB
seemed to remain more or less the same brown. However, given a negative
that matched the emulsion, I never found any superiority of *scale* in
kallitype. VDB could match it tone for tone.

I'm sure I'm not the only one awaits more word on archivality with bated
breath. 70760.1511@CompuServe.COM (Did you "drop in on" Mike Ware, who put out a kallitype query
last year?)

I would say, also, that for the faint of heart and ultra-future minded,
gold or platinum toning the kallitype would increase its archivality at a
much smaller cost than either gold or platinum printing. For my own
esthetic, printing with something worth more than I was went, so to speak,
against the grain.

Cheers,

Judy

----------