From: shannon stoney (sstoney@pdq.net)
Date: 02/27/01-09:02:10 AM Z
Judy wrote:
>
>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.
I am going to make some "test" negatives of my house to experiment with.
>
>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).
I read somewhere that actually, palladium and cyanotype need about the same
density range (1.6), so t hat might work.
--shannon
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 03/06/01-04:55:40 PM Z CST