From: Judy Seigel (jseigel@panix.com)
Date: 02/26/01-10:37:42 PM Z
On Sun, 25 Feb 2001, shannon stoney wrote:
> I am thinking now of going straight for palladium instead of the round
> about route of through cyanotypes. Your comments helped me decide, so
> thanks!
Shannon, you probably figured out by now it would be a good idea to
develop ONE of those negs, try it a bit, and THEN do the other 149, or
maybe even another couple and then the other 147. And while choosing an
ideal negative density, save yourself some guess-and-by-golly and print a
couple of 21 steps... Even retail they cost but $5.40 each (see P-F #1)
and will save you many times that in emulsion and paper.
My guess, by the way, is that Tom Ferguson, certified over-the-top print
perfectionist, might be fussier about printing a cyanotype from palladium
negatives than mere mortals. Or to put it another way, go for the pd neg
and if you ever want to do it in cyano, measure the neg with a 21-step
(the white card trick if you don't have a densitometer) & choose paper to
match that with cyano (P-F #5).
Enjoy...
Judy
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 03/06/01-04:55:40 PM Z CST