From: Witho Worms en Jorien van Santen (verzet13@xs4all.nl)
Date: 04/07/02-09:54:01 AM Z
Hello Alejandro,
What I did is :
Mix an equal amount of Ammonium Ferric Oxalate (in my case 35%) with an
equal amount of Potassium Chloroplatinite (in my case a 33,9%). Equal means
according to the amounts involved in the reaction.
I coat on Arches platine and let it dry for 90-120 seconds. After that I
make a quick blow with a fan (no heat) for 20-30 seconds (for a 11x14 inch
print).
Than I print, pre-wash for two minutes and clear in EDTA.
I mix al my chemicals myself and I buy powdered metals (salts) at Bostick's.
I use strong concentrations, as said, based on Jeffrey's research. You can
try a double coat. I coat Arches just below a 'bleeding' point. Lately I
have been experimenting with a double coat on Arches based on a 20% Afo.
This allows me to use a platinum mixture that stays in solution at room
temperature and gives me a high D max.
Let me know if it worked for you.
Cheers,
Witho
----- Original Message -----
From: "Alejandro Lopez de Haro" <alhr@wanadoo.fr>
To: <alt-photo-process-l@skyway.usask.ca>
Sent: Sunday, April 07, 2002 2:25 PM
Subject: Re: DeCosse prints
> Hi Witho:
>
> Let me recapitulate. The Ziatype printing methods that I use is as
follows:
>
> a) Ammonium Ferric Oxalate
> B) Lithium Palladium Solution #3 (Lithium Chloropalladite) from B&S
> c) Rinse in water
> d) Clear
>
> Note: I use equal combination of drops of AFO and Lithium Palladium.
> Example: 14 drops AFO and14 drops LPS#3.
>
> Now, what are you suggesting is:
>
> a)Ammonium Ferric Oxalate
> b)Potassium Chloroplatinite (Platinum Solution #3 from B&S)
> c) Rinse in water
> d) Clear
>
> Note: You are suggesting non-equal combination of AFO and platinum?
Example
> 35% of 14 drops of AFO= 5 drops of AFO and 14 drops of platinum?
>
> Note: Or you buying from B&S just one chemical already mixed with AFO and
> platinum for Ziatype?
>
> Regards,
>
> Alejandro López de Haro
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Witho Worms en Jorien van Santen" <verzet13@xs4all.nl>
> To: <alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca>
> Sent: Sunday, April 07, 2002 12:46 PM
> Subject: Re: DeCosse prints
>
>
> I will say just try. I use Jeffrey Matthias concentrations for (Zia) POP
> prints as described in his manual, 35% Afo in combination with the
platinum
> chemicals I got from B&S, mixed in the right strength. Just treat as if it
> were a palladiumprint.
> I work on Arches platine.
> But because many odd things happen in my life (bookshelves fall from my
> studiowall which according to the one who sold it to me can't happen) I
will
> verify my memory coming week.
>
> Witho
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Alejandro Lopez de Haro" <alhr@wanadoo.fr>
> To: <alt-photo-process-l@skyway.usask.ca>
> Sent: Friday, April 05, 2002 11:00 PM
> Subject: Re: DeCosse prints
>
>
> > Hi Witho:
> >
> > I have never try it. According to Carl and also is written in his book
in
> > collaboration with Sullivan, they mention that this is not possible.
> >
> > What are you doing that it is different?
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Alejandro
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Witho Worms en Jorien van Santen" <verzet13@xs4all.nl>
> > To: <alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca>
> > Sent: Friday, April 05, 2002 11:37 AM
> > Subject: Re: DeCosse prints
> >
> >
> > Alejandro,
> >
> > To make a pure platinum print there is no need for brush development.
Just
> > use ammonium ferric oxalate and process as a POP print (Zia). If you
don't
> > dry the paper completely after coating then there is no need for
> > development.
> >
> > Witho
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Alejandro Lopez de Haro" <alhr@wanadoo.fr>
> > To: <alt-photo-process-l@skyway.usask.ca>
> > Sent: Friday, April 05, 2002 10:50 AM
> > Subject: Re: DeCosse prints
> >
> >
> > > Hi Keith:
> > >
> > > I did try to make sense of what you said about a "spreader", but
> honestly
> > I
> > > can't picture it. Could you possible mail it to me off the list as a
> jpeg
> > > file? I have no problem with large jpeg file, I have cable internet.
> > >
> > > When I ask you about "brush development" I meant developing by brush
the
> > > 100% platinum print, not the coating part. In other words, the
developer
> > is
> > > in the brush instead in the tray.
> > >
> > > Concerning the enlarged negative vs. the non enlarged negative
> (in-camera
> > > negative), I agree with you 100%, there is something missing in the
> > enlarged
> > > one when you look the final print.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > Alejandro López de Haro
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Keith Taylor" <keithmtaylor@mac.com>
> > > To: <alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca>
> > > Sent: Friday, April 05, 2002 9:06 AM
> > > Subject: Re: DeCosse prints
> > >
> > >
> > > Alejandro,
> > > I coat the paper using a small spreader made from "velvet" wrapped
> > > around a piece of plastic, 2" x 3". It's more of a synthetic velvet,
if
> > > that makes sense. For the larger prints it's just a matter of making a
> > > larger version. I've used brushes which work OK for the smaller prints
> > > but I just cannot make a rod/tube work for me. I did use a rod in
> > > Britain which worked fine, but here in the USA, no way. The spreaders
> > > are so easy to make in batches you don't have to worry too much about
> > > cleaning them etc.
> > > Can I tell the difference between prints? I guess the differences are
> > > there if you look for them. A print from an in-camera negative 11x14
or
> > > thereabouts will always be better ( or should be ) than a 3rd or 4th
> > > generation image. But with careful working methods, choice of films
etc.
> > > it's possible to come extremely close.
> > > Keith.
> > > On Thursday, April 4, 2002, at 12:22 PM, Alejandro Lopez de Haro
wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Keith:
> > > >
> > > > When you say that the prints are all platinum, are you brush
> developing?
> > > >
> > > > Congratulations on your forthcoming coauthoring portfolio.
> > > >
> > > > On another thought, can you tell the difference from a p/p prints
made
> > > > from
> > > > a non-enlarged negative and one from an enlarged negative?
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > >
> > > > Alejandro López de Haro
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: "Keith Taylor" <keithmtaylor@mac.com>
> > > > To: <alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca>
> > > > Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2002 4:59 AM
> > > > Subject: DeCosse prints
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >> Alejandro,
> > > >> Cy's prints - all platinum - vary from 14" square through to about
> > > >> 34" x
> > > >> 20". The majority, as you say, are approx. 20" square. They are
all
> > > >> enlarged from either 120 or 4x5 negs. I have only experimented a
> > > >> couple
> > > >> of times with digital output using an imagesetter. That was for one
> of
> > > >> the 34"x20" prints, but eventually, because of time constraints, I
> made
> > > >> the negative using the Arista lith film, APHS. Too much to learn
too
> > > >> quickly!
> > > >> Regarding your previous message about co-signing prints, that's a
> > > >> tricky
> > > >> one. All of the prints are made under Cy's supervision at his
studio,
> > > >> but I don't sign the prints. I've heard all the arguments for and
> > > >> against the practise. I've just finished a portfolio of polymer
> > > >> photogravures for Cy that will be co-signed though.
> > > >> Regards,
> > > >>
> > > Keith Taylor
> > > Minneapolis MN
> > > (612) 721 2286
> > > >>
> > > >> On Wednesday, April 3, 2002, at 09:34 AM, Alejandro Lopez de Haro
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>> Hi Keith:
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Just curious, de Cosse prints comes in all sizes, but I think the
> > > >>> largest
> > > >>> ones are: 23x18", are these made by a 20x24 camera or are these
> > > >>> enlarged
> > > >>> negatives? If so, are they digitally enlarged negatives?
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Regards,
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Alejandro
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 05/01/02-11:43:29 AM Z CST