Re: Mordancage Process

Judy,
> Chris, I've been puzzling over why my experience with these chemicals was
> so different from yours -- as I've noted I found copper sulfate worked
> fine

Never got copper sulfate to work for me.

, and after I used up my first bottle of bomb-grade peroxide, I began
> using drugstore stuff at about a tenth of the price.

Yes, found lately this will work, if used as the "water" in the mix; in
other words, 1 liter of the hy per plus 15g copper chloride plus 40ml
glacial acetic, with no added water. But after a while this poops out. I
prefer mixing my A solution separately from the hy per, tho. I mix up
water, glacial acetic, and copper chloride and always have that on hand in
the darkroom with a bottle of 20v hy per next to it, and usually print an
extra print of all my work for mordancaging, if the image warrants it.

But I still only
> needed about twice the amount called for, and even then the bleach would
> keep for a few days & could be re-used, at least with heating.

Never had to heat; yes, bleach can be reused, if bottled. Since it is the
peroxide that is responsible for the dissolution, which can only occur where
there is oxygenation and acidity, it is an important part of the mix; when
it poops out, the solution doesn't work as fast or as well or at all. Acid
and oxygen have to be maintained.
>
> What occurs to me is it might have been that I was using an old paper --
> probably 20 years old at the time, if not more (the Brovira #6). "They"
> say old papers didn't have the supercoating, or hardening that modern
> papers have, causing problems with bromoil for modern papers (tho they
> seem to have been overcome?).

This is probably exactly it. I think in my article I say that all papers
work. I probably want to modify that to say, "Don't use Bergger" because it
works, but is frustrating. This surprises me, because in all respects
Bergger is very similar to Forte. Forte does fine in mordancage. So I am
not sure why this is happening with Bergger now, but it is possible that as
you say there is some supercoating hardening thing going on. I can
eventually get it to lift, but by that time there is staining going on
because I have back and forthed into the mixes too many times. I thought
maybe my bleach had pooped out, but when I put a piece of Ilford in there,
instant disintegration. I processed all these prints at the same time and
chemicals initially so it has to be the paper itself.
>
> I was doing the mordancage where you etch before fixing, and then
> reverse (expose to white light & redevelop), and wash without fixing
> (nothing left to fix, presumably). But it sounds like you're doing that
> too?
>
> Then below you say something probably isn't archival. Because you painted
> on fix? My reversals have as far as I can tell been archival (about 20
> years). But they had no fixer.

The reasons why this isn't archival are several: the mix is SO acid
(2.6-3.5pH) and so damaging that I would assume there is some of that
acidity and chemical left in the paper. This can be neutralized with the
baking soda bath.
     However, if you are leaving veils attached, there is no way you are
going to rinse the chemicals completely out with extended washing. I put my
print in the developer, and as soon as it is ready I put it in a tray of
water and rinse briefly so as not to disturb the veils, but with that brief
rinse, some chemicals remain in the paper.
     If you do not redevelop completely, the image will darken/redden over
time, not like a normal print because you have presumably processed the
print a while ago, and fixed most of the silver out. But the process does
rehalogenize some of the silver and that is what darkens/reddens/silvers
out.
     If you do, as you are saying, develop your print, mordancage, and then
wipe it all off exposing it to light and then fix and wash as per normal,
your print will be archival because I assume all of your silver remaining
has solarized to black so it can't get any darker/browner, there are no
veils that you want to leave so you can wash it for an hour without altering
your mordancage, and you have fixed after the mordancage so rehalogenized
silver is out.
     I will say, that the beauty of mordancage is that over time it does
change slightly. I remember one student's print of a mordancaged cowgirl
that she finished, didn't like, and gave to a friend. I saw it at this
friend's house a year later and it was just beautiful--all silvery. So the
changes that occur are good.
     Got my Elaine Scarry paper done, all the while gum printing, and now
onto 2 more papers...
Chris
>
> Judy
>
>
>
> Then add your acetic acid; if you
> > don't have glacial, you can fudge with vinegar or stop bath. The point
> > is to keep the acidity of the solution low enough for it to work, so you
> > can keep adjusting that as you go along. See how easy it can be? Get
> your
> > bottle of hy per, dump some copper chloride and vinegar in there, and
go.
> > But if you can, get 20v because the hydrogen peroxide is what does the
> > disintegrating. Don't bother with the stronger stuff; it is not
necessary,
> > really--20v works just fine.
> >
> > Next, the paper that works hands down incredibly well (I've used
> > Bergger, Forte, and Ilford) is Ilford. All types, fiber and RC. It is
a
> > charm. I have difficulty with Bergger for some reason, but all this
means
> > is that I bleach, develop, and then bleach and redevelop again, instead
of
> > just doing it one time. Unfortunately you have more trouble with stain
that
> > way. So for your first attempt, Ilford is great. It disintegrates in a
> > minute or two max.
> >
> > Third, I have not put some images back in the developer and then
> > exposed them in sunlight. You get some really intriguing tones that
way, as
> > there is rehalogenized silver after the bleaching process. You can even
> > paint on fixer at some point with a brush and you'll get even more color
> > variations. I would suggest scanning these and filing them on a CD rom
> > because they will change over time--it certainly isn't archival.
> >
> > That should get you started with some ideas; I have lots more :)
> > Chris
>
Received on Mon Dec 8 06:54:39 2003