See below for info from the Archives and from Usenet.
Luis Nadeau
NADEAUL@NBNET.NB.CA
Fredericton, New Brunswick, Canada
http://www3.nbnet.nb.ca/nadeaul/
Date: Wed, 17 May 1995 05:25:11 +1000
Reply-To: alt-photo-process@vast.unsw.edu.au Originator:
alt-photo-process@vast.unsw.edu.au Sender:
alt-photo-process@vast.unsw.edu.au Precedence: bulk
From: Greg Schmitz <gws1@columbia.edu>
To: Multiple recipients of list <alt-photo-process@vast.unsw.edu.au>
Subject: Re: Chromoskedasic Painting
X-Comment: Alternative Photographic Processes mailing list
>From trn@netcom.com Mon May 15 08:48:42 1995
>Over the years I have dabbled in duotone solorization with some success.
>Recently I read several articles on the subject and purchased the
>chemicals and tried some small sheet experiments. My results were
>unimpressive and figured I was doing something wrong even though I tried
>quite a few variations in the process.
>Has anyone had any success with the process or familiar with it?
Ted,
Here is a copy of a letter that I wrote, but never sent to SciAm. I made
several references to articles you may or may have not seen. Both of the
_Camera_Arts_ articles (Cordier; Moers) contain instructions.
December 22, 1991
Mr. Jonathan Piel
Editor
SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN, INC.
415 Madison Avenue
New York, NY 10017
Dear Mr. Piel,
My enthusiasm at seeing not one but two articles on photographic processes
in the November 1991 issue of your magazine, "Chromoskedasic Painting," by
Dominic Man-Kit Lam and Bryant W. Rossiter and "The Amateur Scientist" by
Lam and Alexandra J. Barna, turned quickly to dismay.
While Lam and Rossiter claim to have "discovered serendipitously one autumn
evening in 1980" the process they call "chromoskedasic painting" the
process is hardly new. Pirre Cordier claims to have invented the process in
1956. Cordier's images, he called them Chemigrams, were displayed years
before the 1980 date claimed by Lam and Rossiter. Photographer Denny Moers
has published work made using negatives and a similar process that he has
dated 1979 (see enclosed: "Art & Alchemy; Chemigrams by Pierre Cordier."
Camera Arts, Dec. 1982.; "Brushes with Light; Photographs by Denny Moers."
and "Brushes with Light, Explained." both from Camera Arts, Nov./Dec.
1981.).
Appropriation and misatribution were not the articles only faults. Lam and
Rossiter's `scientific' explanation was vague, at least, nonexistent at
best, "Scientists still do not understand in detail how the size and shape
of the particles influence the scattering of light and hence the colors of
chromoskedasic paintings." A description of Lam's procedures for
investigating the properties of the process were also lacking. All in all
the article seems to me like more of a plug for Lam's book than anything
else.
In "The Amateur Scientist Column" Lam and co-author Barna advised the
reader that "The method utilizes commonly available photographic supplies,"
then they repeatedly emphasize the use of Kodak chemicals and papers. Kodak
is hardly the only manufacturer of B/W paper and the formulations that Lam
uses are widely published and can be formulated from scratch or purchased
from numerous suppliers. No formulas were given and no other suppliers
mentioned. The column smacks of favoritism towards Kodak made all the more
inappropriate when it is considered that Lam's other coauthor, Rossiter, is
a Kodak employee.
Your publication covers a broad range of topics and is geared to a wide
range of readers both scientists and non- scientists; credibility is thus
of utmost importance. In this case you have touched upon a field with which
I am familiar and failed to provide unbiased and factual information - I
hope this is not a trend. As it stands, I will think twice before buying
your magazine in the future.
==============
From: bg174@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Michael Gudzinowicz)
Subject: Re: Chromoskedasic Pseudo-Solarization
Organization: The National Capital FreeNet, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Date: Tue, 16 May 1995 14:47:44 GMT
RICHARD CAYNE <r_cayne@vega.concordia.ca> wrote:
> Please indicate how to do this process, what type of prints
> work best etc. Saw some images at a recent photo
> exhibition..Looks great on outdoor architectural scenes.
The different approaches are a bit too long to paraphrase and
post. Two good articles written by William Jolly appeared in
Darkrooom and Creative Camera Techniques (POB 48312, Niles, IL
60714; 800-877-5410). The articles were in the Sep/Oct 1993
issue (p.28) and the Nov/Dec 1992 issue (p.30).
Briefly, he exposed high contrast Kodabrome II RC F similar to
what one would do for a normal print, developes in dektol 1+1
for 30-50 sec, and rinses in water for 2 min. The print is
treated for 30 sec with 5% thiocyanate or 35% solution of S30
stablizer, is "squeegeed", and permitted to stand 1 min. It is
put into 1+7 or 1+1 Dektol (depending on thiocyanate or
S30 use) and immediately removed, and placed on a flat surface
for 1-3 min for color development, then stopped and "just"
fixed. Other procedures give different colors... it seems
straightforward.
Other useful/related articles include Jolly's "Direct Positive
Transparencies by Sabatier Solarization" (Jan/Feb 1992), and
"New Uses for Solarization" (Jan/Feb 1991; excellent intro to
solarization and practical uses).
==================
Newsgroups: rec.photo.darkroom
For Tyler,
two articles - Darkroom and Creative Camera Techniques, Nov '92 and Sept '93
author William Jolly, in chem dept at UofC, Berkeley.
He was using Ektamatic chemistry, is it still available in US?
Anyway, the activator is a dilute potassium hydroxide solution, the stab is a
thiocyanate.
Normal or less initial exposure. 35-50 seconds in Dektol either 1:1 or 1:2.
2 minute water rinse. 25-30 seconds in 5% sodium thiocyanate solution.
Squeegee and stannd for 1 minute. Quickly dip in Dektol 1:7, immediately
remove and lay print without draining. Fix and wash normally.
More colour method
Use Dektol 1:1 in a 1:3 mix with the thiocyanate solution (1).
Use second thio bath after standing print. Mix 1:2, thio/Dektol.
Additional method (may generate bad gases)
Omit thio bath and stand. Go directly from development to:
15 parts Dektol stock
60 parts water
12 parts thio
35 parts S2 activator (or a weak hydroxide solution)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.photo.darkroom
From: trn@netcom.com (ted nichols)
Subject: Re: Chromoskedaesic Pseudosolarization
Date: Thu, 8 Dec 1994 15:24:54 GMT
Tyler Cope (aa550@FreeNet.Carleton.CA) wrote:
: Does anyone remember reading an article about Chromoskedaesic
...etc......
Funny you should ask at the same time I did.....small world!
1. View Camera Sept/Oct 92
2. Darkroom Techniques Sept/Oct 93
Let me know what you use and what kind of results you obatin
Ted
trn@netcom.com
-- trn@netcom.comTed Nichols