From: Christopher Lovenguth (chrisml@pacbell.net)
Date: 09/25/02-07:02:04 PM Z
I'm keeping the window closed. What I read is that the Becquerel process can
fog very easily from heat and I think I was experiencing this in my previous
attempts when I put my plate outside all day long in the sun. With keeping
the plate indoors protected by the window and not in direct sunlight, I
think I'm keeping the fogging at bay. Plus I think the slower development
due too the window glass and indirect light is helping with the tones.
Now with the photofloods, I know they have hardly any UV light but I have
read that even a 100 watt tungsten bulb will develop out the plate, so I
started trying that first to expose the plate with the chrome film. I kept
getting no results so as a last resort I tried the 500 watt photoflood. I
started at 10 minutes and have eventually found out after several tries that
it needs only about 25 seconds. I think a UV light source might actually be
too powerful for what I'm doing if it only takes a few seconds with a
photoflood. -Chris
-----Original Message-----
From: Judy Seigel [mailto:jseigel@panix.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2002 1:46 PM
To: alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca
Subject: Re: Was someone asking about printing daguerreotypes from film?
On Wed, 25 Sep 2002, Christopher Lovenguth wrote:
> I'm putting the plate into a holder with the rubylith covering the plate
and
> putting it in my apartment window which faces south and a very little east
> in San Francisco starting around 7am. I come home around 6pm and fix it
with
> hypo, wash and guild. That's it.
You don't say if window is open or closed -- glass cuts down on UV
trnasmission, either over all or below a certain wave length, I forget
which. But in any event, if window is closed odds are you're losing useful
exposure.
Photoflood, again if I remember correctly, does put out plenty heat, but
light mostly in visible range -- not that much UV -- and very high use of
electricity, plus short life of bulb. It might pay to change to some kind
of UV lighting.
J.
> Once I get the exposure time down under the photoflood, this will be one
of
> the easier alt processes I have done (excluding the buffing of the plate
> which I'm still awful at)! Of course it is a completely different story
> trying to get an image in camera which is where I want to be at. But for
> right now I'm happy with doing things this way and if I can get some
> consistency and a body of work visually interesting, I'll think it's
> affective. -Chris
>
>
> >From: "Robert W. Schramm" <schrammrus@hotmail.com>
> >Reply-To: alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca
> >To: alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca
> >Subject: Re: Was someone asking about printing daguerreotypes from film?
> >Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2002 12:15:31 -0400
> >
> >
> >Christopher,
> >
> > I viewed you image and like it very much. I do Hg developed dags.
> >I like very much to colors you are getting. Tell me how you lay the
> >negative on the fumed plate and get it back off without damaging the
silver
> >iodide coating. Do you also put a piece of glass on to to hold the
negative
> >flat? BTW I sometimes overexpose my plates which causes the highlights to
> >ture blue. One more question: are you using a negative or a positive? I
ask
> >because transparency film will give you a positive, in fact, a color
> >positive.
> >
> >Bob Schramm
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : 10/01/02-03:47:10 PM Z CST