Re: Just Kallitype Now, was Re: Platinum Heresy, was Re: Satista

About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

From: Sandy King (sanking@clemson.edu)
Date: 04/29/03-09:12:39 AM Z


Carl,

>I might even use it
>at 12x20 if I felt like investing the time to eliminate the persistent
>streaking problem I had when I tried it last year--that could have been the
>paper. I was using Lenox and I notice you consider Stonehenge a better
>starting point. Streaks, or any other process-related problem (other than
>spots caused by unseen paper defects) are non-existent in my normal Pt/Pd
>printing.

Stonhenge Rising works a lot better for me than other papers. I tried
Lenox a few months ago and it appeared to work fine but it stained a
lot and complete clearing took a very long time. On the other hand I
did not have any streaking with it from coating.

I personally have not had any streaking problems with either VDB or
kallitype sensitizer. The only time I have run into any problem was
when I tried to skimp on the the amount of sensitizer, and then I
sometimes saw streaking because the sensitizer would start to dry
before I could get it evenly distributed on the paper. My technique
is to use a lot of sensitizer, about 1.5ml for a 5X7 print, pour it
all in the middle, and then brush very lightly with the Richeson
brush to distribute the sensitizer evenly. I brush just until there
is no puddling of the sensitizer on the paper, and then stop. During
this period I will typically go over the area in all directions, from
left to right, top to bottom, and on the diagonal.

Sandy

>
>As for the toning possiblities--I'll leave those comparisons to others. I
>can't stand toning. Making a print one way in order to turn it into
>something else in subsequent steps just isn't the way my mind wants to work.
>Any process that requires toning gets a bunch of demerits from me, and any
>process that gives me results I want directly--as Pt/Pd does--gets a big
>plus for compatibility with the way I like to work.

Kllitypes must be toned if permanence is a consideration. There are
three things that must be done to assure stability of a kallitype
image, complete removal of the residual ferrous oxide, complete
removal of residual silver, and clearing of all hypo. Getting rid of
the silver and hypo is no problem, you just follow standard
procedures for archival processing of silver gelatin prints. However,
it is probably *impossible* to remove all of the residual ferrous
iron in the paper, and even minute amounts if left will eventually
react with and oxidise the silver. This may not happen for several
decades but in my opinion it is almost certain that it will
eventually happen. That is why you must change the silver to
something that the ferrous iron will not oxidise, and the something
else I prefer is a more noble metal such as gold, palladium or
platinum. Selenium toning will also convert the silver into a
substance that will not be oxidised by residual ferrous iron but in
order to tone with selenium you must absolutely first remove all
silver, otherwise the selenium will react with the silver and stain
the image.

So for me making untoned kallityes, except for proofing purposes, is
not an option. I will also add that I like to see photographs with a
wide range of colors and tones. That is one of the reasons I like
carbon printing so much, and I suspect many gum printers feel the
same because of our shared love of pigments.

Sandy


About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : 05/01/03-11:59:55 AM Z CST