Eric Neilsen (e.neilsen@worldnet.att.net)
Fri, 30 Jul 1999 20:40:19 -0500
"Jeffrey D. Mathias" wrote:
> Although the best thing
> would be for you to come visit and observe what I am doing.
A visit would be great, I however, can not make it now or in the short term.
> If the
> paper is going to hold the humidity that well, then it's probably going
> to hold it away from the coating on the surface as well. I suspect that
> the RH of the coating is responding to a controlled value reproducibly
> even though that value is not known.
<SNIP>
>
> AGAIN, I HAVE NO EQUIPMENT TO MEASURE IT.
Neither I, that is why I allow it sit in my cool humidity box for a 1/2 hour after
crispy dry, and that is why I crisp it dry and bring it back to a wetness level in
my other box. It uses a fan and wick type humidifier; rheostat and three speed fan.
> > Others may disagree with me, but its the
> > water content that is enabling the print out, and must be considered an
> > important component that needs controls.
>
> But, this is one of the things I noticed as well. With the only
> difference being RH, the "wet" one had a very dark, black, very high
> contrast printout. It is important. The question is how much control.
> The more important question is can the "wet" technique be controlled to
> not produce the solarization effect and still keep the dramatic high
> contrast printout???
I suspect that we both control our procedures very well. I watched bits of a
20/20 program last night on memory and the fast pace of technology in modern
gadgets. Mostly a fluff program which is why I channel hopped away, but it did have
a segment on a cook and her ability to internally time several different dishes at
once. I have no doubt that you can judge the "readiness" of a piece of coated
paper, but some measurement in minutes really helps me compare what I do to what you
do.
I still haven't printed out your concentration test on AFO et al, but I don't see
any reason to use any of Dick's solutions as they were. In Ware's paper as with my
own experience, a coated humidified piece is no good after 2 hours. I never go
past 1 hour. As for the range, Ware shows a range from about 30% to 70% with little
change in maximum density. There is however, quite a change in print quality
throughout that range due to relative speed differences between platinum and
palladium.
I have yet to solarize a print with my current set up. The last and only solarized
print that I had, was from a poorly made enlarged negative that I did in a borrowed
darkroom and printed on an unfamiliar light. The negative has since been redone.
This is the very thing, control of humidity, that has kept me away from the term
Ziatype for POP printing. I might go with Ziahype.
I did also notice that Artcraft is selling powdered ferric. I thought that he was
only selling liquid. I am going to get some and do some test.
-- Eric J. Neilsen 4101 Commerce Street, Suite #9 Dallas, TX 75226 214-827-8301 http://home.att.net/~e.neilsen
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu Oct 28 1999 - 21:40:39