Re: Argyrotypes!

About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

From: Sandy King (sanking@CLEMSON.EDU)
Date: 01/14/03-03:14:36 PM Z


Judy Seigel wrote:

>On Tue, 14 Jan 2003, epona wrote:
>
>>
>> Hi Sandy,
>>
>> Thanks for your thoughts. I went with Argyrotype because, well, I don't
>> like blue prints, and most of what I heard about the process was positive.
>> Also I preferred the few Argyrotypes I saw over VD and Kalli. We should
>> take a poll on which iron process is everyone's favorite.
>>
>
>
>Upcoming (yes, really, UV light at the end of the tunnel) Post-Factory has
>a form of VDB you may like better, plus some variations of silver-printout
>from Liam that are most intriguing. I haven't done them so I say "seem" --
>they seem to be much easier & at least as good.
>
>J.

I certainly look forward to the article in PF on VDB, with perhaps
something on kallitype as well?

My own thoughts regarding a favorite among the iron processes is that
these processes are quite similar in terms of their look and in the
composition of their final image. The only major difference in is
that Argyrotype and VDB are *primarily* POP while kallitype is DOP.
With certain negatives, depending on the DR, one might get a slightly
different look from a DOP process as opposed to POPl.

In theory, at least as Mike Ware explains it, it may be somewhat
easier to get better archival quality from Argyrotype, but if one
takes the time with VDB and kallitype to do it right there is not
reason these processes should not be just as permanent.

So basically the questions one would have about the three processes
are, 1) what are the final image qualities as regards color,
contrast, tonal scale, etc. and 2) are there advantages, say in
expense or time, in using one over the other.

With regard to the first question, I would say that except for the
issue of a POP look as opposed to a DOP there is little if any
difference in the final image, assuming that one tones the print. It
is true that the *native* color of argyroptype, VDB and kallitype can
vary greatly according to a variety of factors, but when prints with
any of these processes are toned, as they really should be for
maximal image permanence, there are virtually no differences because
toned prints assume the characteristic color of the toning metal,
and/or of the toning formula. I am certain that one would not be able
to tell the difference between a toned argyrotype, VDB or kallitype,
for example, putting aside the POP and DOP issues, of course, which
with certain negatives might result in a particular look.

Regarding the second question, on the face of it VDB and Argyrotype
would appear to be easier to process than kallitype. In the case of
VDB, for example, most books describe wet processing in terms of
three steps, 1) brief water rinse, 2) fixing, and 3) washing.
However, if VDBs are processed for maximum permanence other steps are
required. First, it is important that the initial wash be done in
slightly acidic bath, the print should be toned, and we might also
need to use one or two clearing baths after toning. And as with
kallitype we should also use two fixing baths and a hypo clearing
agent before final wash. So when weigh all of this we find that the
processing of a VDB, for permanence, is only slightly simpler than
processing kallitype.

Sandy King

-- 

About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : 02/21/03-10:44:16 AM Z CST