From: Christina Z. Anderson (tracez@mcn.net)
Date: 03/31/01-10:49:44 PM Z
Thanx, Bob, for the info on hydrogen peroxide. BTW, this IS the REAL
thing--the bottle is not a frufru hairdresser kinda thing, but super strong,
130 vol 35% hp. It reeks. LUCKILY today I was going to experiment (my
next day on the mordancage process) with this at close to full strength, but
then decided instead to stick with using a 40vol hp. I had bought 20, 40,
and 130 from the beauty supply. Thank goodness I did, because with the 40
vol, the print bleached out probably in 30 seconds, unlike the 2-3 minutes
with the 20. So there is absolutely no need to use the really strong stuff,
except if you can get the 40, the speed is great. Hairdressers always
carry 40vol for frosting hair.
Thanx Jonathan, also, for your taking the time to answer copious
questions--have a good couple weeks off!
So I went in today and used RC prints this time. Oriental VC RP. I
experimented two ways, using non hardening fix (Kodak without the hardener
added) with both: first, I developed the print, fixed, and then bleached,
and then redeveloped in either thiocarbamide toner or LPD developer 1:3.
Then I tried this: I developed, bleached, redeveloped in developer, and
then fixed. Both methods produced similar results: there is a remaining
positive image that consists of the lighter, higher contrast parts, and the
darks all "veil" or wave like a Polaroid emulsion lift, attached, sometimes
barely, to the surface of the print, usually along an edge where light meets
dark. The RC absolutely stayed clean white (the fiber paper stained always
in the whites and in the borders of the print, actually all over). In both
processes the RC emulsion veiled immediately in the bleach bath and was
quite fragile--if I rubbed at all, as per Coote, it would have left the
print totally clear. I used high contrast filters and low contrast filters
and found that actually I preferred a no. 2 filter with my image, and also
preferred printing it kind of light, not dark as Schultz says. The darks
lift too easily so the lighter tones carry more image to be left attached to
the paper.
Some looked like a cross between veiling and negative/solarized image,
thus making me realize that the two images I saw at SCAD--the one that
looked solarized and the other primordial--were the same process but
probably just differed in the amount of rubbing that occurred. If you take
a ball of cotton and rub off all the veiling emulsion, you are left with the
etched highlights which then grab the toner and thus create a negative
image. If you don't rub, you keep your positive.
I only printed negatives, not slides, onto BW enlarging paper.
The thing is this about the process, tho: I was not wearing a mask,
and I don't think the ventilation is great in the gang lab. I kept a tray
over the bleach etch solution and uncovered it only during the 30 secs I
bleached, but what I found was that the fixer began to smell horrible,
sulfidey or....just very unhealthy. Not being knowledgeable about chemistry
at all, what could be happening? To refresh memory, in the bleach there is
copper chloride, hydrogen peroxide, and glacial acetic acid. Is the
hydrogen from the hp combining with the fix and forming some poisonous
gas??? I mean, after 4 hours I quit. It really had an awful odor that made
me nauseous. This did not happen the day before when I was working on
previously printed prints and did not use the fixer.
Answers to questions, now:
> > But then, Judy discussed at one point performing this process between
the
> > developer and the fix (during the original printing of the negative) -
which
> > I assume would mean under safe lights. Could be interesting....
>
Yes, I did use safelights today, and actually, the whole process could
easily be carried out under safelight because the veiling is very apparent
even in low light. But I only used safelights because I was printing a
fresh print. It just doesn't make sense to me (someone can enlighten me)
that when you redevelop with developer you can carry that out in room light.
I assume bleach changes the chemical makeup of the remaining silver just as
potassium ferricyanide changes fixed silver to silver ferricyanide (?) that
can also be redeveloped in developer, but apparently it is not light
sensitive? But it still combines with the developer to produce an image?
Man, I really think I need to take chemistry. Sil Horowitz, here I come.
> Yes, under safe light... tho Judy confesses she doesn't understand the
> point if the print has already been FIXED. Then what do you have left
> except midtones and raw paper????
I'm not sure how to answer this, or that I get the question. After fixing
the print, you have a print as per normal. It has all the normal tones of a
print, both before the bleach process and then after redevelopment.
>
> If you start with a developed but UNFIXED print, of course you get a
> reversal.
No you don't--with developing, bleaching, and then redeveloping, you get a
positive from a negative, just as if you were doing a 2 tone sepia or
thiocarbamide toner. Same thing.
You could start with a positive.... or solarize as I did for a
> reversal of the reversal, making a positive. If it's already fixed -- what
> do you redevelop?
If it is fixed, then bleached, then plopped back in the developer (or toner)
it redevelops just as when you are bleaching a print with a normal potassium
ferricyanide/potassium bromide bleach before thiocarbamide toning. It's
just that the bleach etch is like a mega powerful bleach that doesn't just
remove the color from a print as ferricyanide does, but lifts the emulsion
off the base of the print into veils and waves and blobs. The veils look
just like those that you get when lifting Polaroid film off its base in hot
water.
>
> You mention stains. This is unfamiliar.... What kind ? On purpose for the
> effect? Also "veiling"... Of what ?
The staining of the WHOLE print I did not want. This only happened on the
fiber, and looks unpleasant, like when you take a developed but not fixed
print and bring it out into room light for a really long time, and then
don't redevelop but put it straight in fixer--a kind of dull caramel tone to
the whole surface, or grey/mauve on coldtone paper. But, when I was working
on those prints last night I was having a heyday going back and forth,
hither and thither, trying new things, and probably really degraded my paper
base. The veiling part of this question is answered above.
I find that describing this online takes way longer than showing the
process! Excuse my wordiness. Now, if I could figure out how to get an
image up on a page online, I could scan these and let you guys see them so
it wouldn't be a mystery.
Chris
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 04/02/01-09:55:27 AM Z CST