dsbryant@mindspring.com
Date: 07/25/02-07:53:06 AM Z
Carl,
>Try skipping the post-staining step with TXT. Just use a normal water
wash after fixing. I find that TXT in PMK is the clear best choice for
Pt/Pd printing. Which makes it all the more annoying that Kodak
overcharges outrageously for special orders.
>
Not to beat a dead horse but I've quit post staining with PMK a long ago and
I'm still getting too much stain for UV printing. I tray develop and I may be
agitating too much.
As an alternative I'm now trying Sandy King's Pyrocat HD developer. I haven't
had much time to UV print my negatives processed with P-Cat so I don't have a
conclusion about that developer. They do scan very well and I've been proofing
with inkjet prints (the 4x5s).
On another note a few weeks ago I attempted to make an Extrvaganza-type (or
what ever you called it in TNPP which I have read many times) and ended up
with essentially a POP platinum print. An interesting surprise. Now mater how
much I dried my paper I could never get a "faint image print" to appear and
develop out with brush development. Christian Nze told me that I had produced
a Pigzelli-type (sorry about the spelling). The print was made on Arches
Platine.
The print turned out *very* nice BTW and the glycerin-potassium oxalate
developer helped to clear the print easily. The print had a richness that I've
not seen in my ziatypes.
Any suggestions about how to correct the POP effect and get those complex
subtle tones of brush development you wrote about?
Thanks for your continued help and contributions,
Don Bryant
PS I visit your web site often and enjoy your work a lot. Seeing your newest
work is always rewarding for me. It would be great to see it up close and
personal one of these days.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : 09/19/02-11:11:01 AM Z CST