From: clay (wcharmon@wt.net)
Date: 02/03/02-04:35:26 PM Z
Jeff:
Your analysis totally agrees with my experience with those two papers. For
whatever reason, I use the lenox on smaller 4x5 and 5x7 prints and the
Platine on larger 8x10 and 7x17's. Not really sure why other than maybe I
don't want to 'waste' the pricey Platine on anything but something big, and
it is certainly easier to handle wet in the larger print sizes.
Just curious, what developer was used, and at what temperature was your test
done? When I use hot (130-140 degrees+) Potassium oxalate, the Platine's
shadow areas seem to maybe be warmer than the Lenox.
Clay
----------
>From: Jeff Buckels <jeffbuck@swcp.com>
>To: alt-photo-process-l@skyway.usask.ca
>Subject: Lenox Redux
>Date: Sun, Feb 3, 2002, 4:11 PM
>
>Printed with Lenox yesterday. Observations follow, all as compared to
>Platine, the only other paper I've used to any extent:
>
>For 25 to 50 sheets, Lenox is $1 a sheet (22/30) from D. Smith. Platine
>is four or six times more expensive, depending on the vendor and
>quantity.
>
>I printed a 5x7 portrait that I had previously printed on Platine. I
>was very happy with that print. Same everything but the paper (10 drops
>FO, 5 drops pt, 5 drops pd, dev. in Potassium Ox., with contrast kicked
>up "two stops" w/ sodium dichromate solution).
>
>Lenox is just slightly creamy white, as compared to Platine's pretty
>dang white.
>
>Coating (w/ Richeson 9010 brush) very easy w/ both papers.
>
>Both prints exposed for 10' in Edwards 11x14 inch black light oven.
>
>The Lenox print is warmer. Not overwhelmingly so, just warmer. With
>myself and three civilians voting, it was a tie as to which print had
>the better color -- the relatively warm Lenox or the more neutral
>Platine print.
>
>The evaluators, including myself, felt there was something subtly
>"clearer" about the Platine print. It is very hard to nail this down
>but I believe the difference was real. I don't know if this is the
>consequence of the difference in color, and I didn't have the chemicals
>on hand to try and duplicate the color of the Platine somehow and see.
>
>The vaunted "smooth tonal transition" of the Lenox was there. I found
>it pretty much impossible to distinguish the Lenox from the Platine on
>this basis.
>
>The Platine had better dmax.
>
>The Lenox paper retains a lot of moisture in development. My
>development runs about twenty minutes: dev., rinse, clearing, rinse,
>clearing, wash. Lenox gets quite soggy, esp. at the corners. You can
>ding the edges by less-than-careful tray handling during the wet
>processing. If you hang the print from a clothespin or whatever just
>after wet processing, the pin will leave an indentation, maybe even
>produce a tear. The Platine is tougher in this way. Cotton vs. rag
>paper, I guess. Lenox takes much longer to dry than Platine. When dry,
>it seems to handle about the same as Platine.
>
>Lenox displays a curious shady pattern of parallel bars (like 15, let's
>say, lengthwise of a 5x7) which is apparent upon coating and early
>stages of wet processing. It disappears in course of processing. I
>think it's a pattern laid down by the internal sizing, like the
>"blotches" visible when processing Platine (mentioned recently).
>
>That's all I can think of just now.
>
>Jeff Buckels
>
>
>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 03/08/02-09:45:21 AM Z CST