From: clay (wcharmon@wt.net)
Date: 02/09/02-02:23:39 PM Z
Sandy:
I'm only thinking out loud here, but since the light sensitive solution in
VanDyke is ferric ammonium citrate, would there be any contrast control
methods in common with cyanotype? Any cyanotypists out there that have
ideas? Maybe a stretch at best.
Clay
>Clay,
>
>Regarding your suggestion about the possibility of increasing the
>amount of tartaric acid in the sensitizer, I tried that and it did
>not work. I could perhaps try decreasing it, or perhaps some other
>amount of silver nitrate and ferric ammoniumn citrate?
>
>I want to also mention that another method for increasing contrast
>with vandykes, adding dichromate directly to the sensitizer before
>coating it on the paper, does not work either. (I don't recall where
>I saw that suggestion, perhaps on article on The Unblinking Eye.) The
>method appears to work because there is a drastic reduction in
>printing speed, but when you look at the step wedges you will find
>that the number of steps has not changed at all, just their position
>on the scale.
>
>As before, if anybody knows of an effective way to increase the
>contrast of vandyke prints using the classic VDB-1 sensitizer please
>pass it on.
>
>Sandy King
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>Sandy et al:
>>You may be right about James' quoting of secondhand sources without the
>>necessary qualifications/disclaimers. I hope that when I mentioned the
>>book's technique my disclaimer was clear in that I had just read it without
>>actually trying it myself. If that was unclear, I sincerely apologize. With
>>that said, I will suggest one possible avenue for VanDyke contrast increase.
>>I have actually done some work with the Argyrotype, a semi-related process
>>and have had some luck increasing the contrast by adding some additional
>>sulfamic acid. No profound increase, but noticeable on a test wedge. Would
>>it be possible to increase the tartaric acid in the sensitizer and achieve
>>the same effect in the VanDyke process?
>>Clay
>>
>>----------
>>>From: Sandy King <sanking@clemson.edu>
>>>To: alt-photo-process-l@skyway.usask.ca
>>>Subject: Re: Book by Christopher James
>>>Date: Sat, Feb 9, 2002, 9:51 AM
>>>
>>
>>>Judy Seigel wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>On Fri, 8 Feb 2002, George Huczek wrote:
>>>>> I'm glad that you are not the only one who found many of the
>>>>>images in the
>>>>> book to be disappointing! I don't mind seeing nice work done using any
>>>>> technique -- and there are a few nice pictures in the book made with
>>>>> pinhole cameras and Holgas I will admit -- but I am of the
>>>>>opinion that it
>>>>> would have been better to include more "straight" images. There are a
>>>>> small number of nice ziatypes, but not enough balance showing good
>>>>> photography. My bias is towards less experimental work that can be
>>>>> understood by looking at it instead of by reading the caption
>>>>>which states
>>>>> what the artist was trying to achieve.
>>>>
>>>>George, I wish you would expand on that. I'm serious. What is "good
>>>>photography"?
>>>
>>>
>>>I am afraid that my less than half serious comment about the image
>>>content of Christopher James' book may have detracted from a real
>>>serious concern about the reliability of some of the information in
>>>the book. I wasted the better part of an afternoon trying to get more
>>>contrast in a vandyke print following a method James describes in
>>>detail in the book. I now don't believe the method works at all,
>>>which suggests that James simply regurgitated something someone else
>>>said back when without actually testing it himself. That would be ok
>>>if the method were presented as theory but that is not the case.
>>>
>>>Which makes me wonder if other information in the book may be
>>>presented as fact when in reality it is but untested theory. For
>>>example, and staying on the subject of vandyke, do the toning
>>>procedures work as described? Can one actually get brown/black
>> >aubergine colors from lead acetate? Can one effectively tone a
>>>vandyke with a 30:1 selenium toner with hypo clear?
>>>
>>>Sandy King
>>>
>>>
>>>--
>>>
>
>
>--
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 03/08/02-09:45:21 AM Z CST