From: Matti Koskinen (mjkoskin@koti.soon.fi)
Date: 03/12/03-07:38:07 AM Z
Grafist@aol.com wrote:
> ..........................................................
> Hi Matti,
> 10 mins seems a reasonable time to get a decent print.
> Respectfully,what is to be gained by shortening exposure, except a few
> minutes? A longer exposure time gives a greater scale of times when wishing
> to adjust for negatives of varying density.
> Could you please clarify the information posted by Chris, where she
> mentions you, about exposures ``without`` using sensitizer?
> Thanks. John- Photographist- London
Hi
Zimmerman gives actually two methods. The first one is using 1:4
gum/dichromate ratio. So more dichromate than usually. This surely
counts, when getting shorter exposure times than what I normally with
1:1 ratio get.
Another, rather exciting variation of his method is to coat the paper
with sensitizer *without* any pigment using 1:4 ratio, and then painting
with only watercolor over the first layer. Then when this is dry,
another layer of sensitizer is spread over watercolor, left dry and then
exposured. The first method worked for me ok, but the variation I tried,
was a complete failure. The test strip remained all black after soaking
it overnight, only the part that had the longest, in this case 30 min
exposure showed something, the rest was completely black, so it can't be
a question of overexposing.
best
-matti
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : 04/22/03-02:37:25 PM Z CST