Adam Kimball (akimball@finebrand.com)
Tue, 09 Mar 1999 13:41:41 -0800
Great, the comments are rolling in. Much thanks - and keep them coming. However, I'd
like to address one issue now. A number of people have written me offlist with comments
similar to Dave's. I have done a lot of Pt/Pd printing, and have even managed to get
great deals on my precious metal salts- however, I really think it is unfair to suppose
that Pt/Pd/Zia are as cheap as Argyrotypes. Taken from the Bostick & Sullivan website:
All in 100ml Kit:
Argyrotype: $28.70
Ziatype Kit (Lithium): $167.70
Ziatype Kit (Cesium): $184.00
Classic Palladium (25ml $70.17): $140.00
Granted the Argyrotype doesn't include the Hypo, but we can say $5.00 worth will provide
plenty if bought in quantity (say, Bryant Lab).
So, what gives? It looks to me like Pt/Pd/Zia is going to cost about 5x more. And when
you are considering 16x20 and beyond- this does get costly.
-Adam
Dave wrote:
>
> However, if you are going to go to the trouble and expense of making large
> negatives, then why not do a Ziatype? Zia isn't any more expensive than argyrotype
> and the tonal range is much better. Plus the contrast is easily controlled with
> dichromate. A standard neg. (not high contrast) will work with the ziatype. With
> Ziatype you have to do a little mixing of the individual chemicals but it isn't
> difficult at all. Whether you do zia or argyrotype be sure to try a small neg first
> to get some practice.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Dave
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Sat Nov 06 1999 - 10:09:02