From: Joachim (joachim@microdsi.net)
Date: 08/31/00-06:58:07 AM Z
I apologize for my question about Soermarko's developer. I rubhbed the sand
out of my eyes and realized I had read about it in the second volume of the
P-F Journal. Joachim
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joachim Oppenheimer [mailto:joachim@microdsi.net]
> Sent: Thursday, August 31, 2000 8:48 AM
> To: alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca
> Subject: RE: PRE DEVELOPMENT BLEACHING
>
>
> I had also tried contrast reduction for litho with Farmer's
> diluted and found results so erratic that I abandoned it. Can you
> tell us what Soermarko's low contrast developed is, and something
> about it? Thanks. Joachim
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Judy Seigel [mailto:jseigel@panix.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2000 9:48 PM
> > To: alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca
> > Subject: Re: PRE DEVELOPMENT BLEACHING
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, 31 Aug 2000, Rod Fleming wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Bob
> > >
> > > I think you are talking about selective latent image management
> > techniques,
> > > shortened to SLIMT,or the Sterry technique . With reference to
> > prints, this
> > > allows, in effect, for the contrast range of the paper to be
> > modified- in
> > > other words graded paper can be used as a sort of multigrade.
> > >
> > > The original Sterry method used a dichromate bleach but this
> > was revised by
> > > the photographer David Kachel who developed a new version which
> > uses very
> > > dilute potassium ferricyanide (which is used in Farmer's
> > Reducer etc) for a
> > > period of between 1-3 minutes between exposure and
> development. The real
> > > advantage of the technique is that it is _selective and
> > proportional_. It
> > > bleaches the most exposed areas the most.
> >
> > I used the method for lith film... an excellent way to lower contrast
> > while getting good continuous tone for an enlarged negative.
> Mostly I used
> > it on large sheets of Agfa (I think it was Agfa -- green box) direct
> > duplicating -- high contrast in its native form (I'd come into a box of
> > 20x24). It worked very well -- and I have a folder of notes somewhere or
> > other I planned to use for an article in the "Negative thinking" section
> > of P-F..... haven't yet because so many other damn goodies.
> >
> > Kachel may have the whole thing on his web site now (doesn't everybody
> > have everything on their website?) but I got it from an article (maybe
> > 2) he had in Creative Camera & Darkroom Photography or whatever the name
> > of that magazine before it became Photo Techniques.
> >
> > For lith film the correct dilution of the ferricyanide solution
> turned out
> > to be VERY VERY weak... like 1/2% or less... What I didn't understand at
> > the time was that such a weak dilution would have to be used one-shot (I
> > was quite new at all of it), so my results were erratic -- one good one
> > and one where it didn't "work." As I say, I figured that out in
> > retrospect. But the method made a lot of sense for the contrasty
> > duplicating lith available at the time -- whether it would be as useful
> > for pos-neg lith I don't know ... probably as much or more control by
> > using Soemarko's low contrast developer for the positive, then neg from
> > that.
> >
> > Judy
> >
> > .................................................................
> > | Judy Seigel, Editor >
> > | World Journal of Post-Factory Photography > "HOW-TO and WHY"
> > | info@post-factory.org >
> > | <http://rmp.opusis.com/postfactory/postfactory.html>
> > .................................................................
> >
> >
> >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 09/18/00-10:20:31 AM Z CST