>Dear list,
>> I have been unable to access email for several days. In my absence I
>>see that many have stated their opinions on the relative merits of
>Palladio paper vs handcoated. It seems that the following points
>and/or questions need adressing:
>1. The cost of the two methods
>
>2. Why isn't Palladio paper able to be processed with standard>>chemistry?
>3. the percentage of platinum vs palladium
>4. Fresh paper being better than not so fresh paper.
>5. Last but not least the same negative not printing as well on
>>Palladio as opposed to Handcoated.
>Please forgive me if I have left out any other valid points.
I think several very important points have been left out. Sal is more than like
ly right about the technical issues, but some of the artistic ones need clarifi
cation.
1. The "organic" involvement of the artist in the printmaking process has an effect on the artistic expression. The materials one works with come through in the art. Sculpture in clay is much different than that of stone. In photography,
we have in the late 20th Century become further removed from the materials of
our craft. I believe it is this sense of being distanced from our craft that has driven the alt-photo revival. As much as I am fascinated and awestruck with modern digital art, such as seen in the work on the new Photoshop 4.0 CDROM samples, I am as equally struck by the seeming sterility of it all. The controls are there, but the involvement is not, not at the organic level, at least.
2. *Artistic* control over the printmaking variables is very important. What is
the *optimum* ratio of platinum to palladium? For some like David Kennedy, it
is 100% palladium developed in hot potassium oxalate for rich brown tones, for
some like myself, I prefer the neutral grays obtained in Ziatype with a palladum gold mix. Some prefer to print on Bienfang tissue, some like a 300 weight paper, some like a warm toned paper, some like to make their own paper. With Palladio one need not worry, these have all been optimized for us.
One of the more spectacular platinum prints in recent times is a Mapplethorpe flower print made by Martin Axon on canvas, a 24 x24 I believe. A large Palladio
print was not what Martin had in mind. It sold at auction about 5 years ago for $60,000.00. A record for a contemporary handcoated platinum print, and it may
be a record for any contemporary photograph, if one excepts some of Rauschenberg or Warhol like graphics.
3. Sole source. If Palladio goes under, a printers ability to match prints in a
half finished portfolio edition is gone. Better buy enough in the beginning to
finish. All of B&S's products are open formulas, no trade secret ingredients.
When I started B&S that was a consideration. As a handcoated printer I wanted A
BSOLUTE CONTROL over my prints and I expected that my customers desired the same. Several times in the past year we have had to help printers learn handcoating due to (this was what the printers told us) of their inability to obtain Palladio paper. We were told that Palladio was unable to get their base paper and so production was shut down.
As I said before, I believe the average printer can make a better Palladio prin
t than a handcoated print. I will have to admit that this is very lame qualitative assessment, however, when one factors in points 1 and 2 above, it becomes a
comparison of apples and oranges. How does one compare an Ernestine Ruben print on sculptural handmade paper to a Palladio print? I don't wish to belabor the
point. Palladio has a place. If you want to make master prints, you must ultimately be able to control the variables. Palladio may satisfy many people, but those who wish to feel the rush of creativity that handcoating provides, need not apply.
Dick Sullivan
<center>Bostick & Sullivan
PO Box 16639, Santa Fe
NM 87506
505-474-0890 FAX 505-474-2857</center>
</x-rich>