Re: Argyrotype

Stane,
     I bet why I had no problem with it was that I only used the papers
recommended. There was no washout, it did not leach out over extended
washings, it was bleachable with pot ferri if I got it too dark, and it
looked like rich chocolate velvet on Rives. Mmmmm.... However, not being a
VDB printer, I have nothing to compare my results to, so it is possible VDB,
as you and Sandy think, is a better process.

     The papers I have listed are BFK ($2 or $3 per sheet vs. $10 for
Buxton), Atlantis Silversafe, Canson's Opalux Vellum, Crane's Parchment Wove
and 3111 and Kid Finish, Hollingsworth Kent, Saunder's Waterford, Somerset,
Whatman's Watercolor and Printmaking.

     Two problems with unsuitable papers: yellow stain does not wash out,
or brown areas wash out. However, nothing in my notes about silvering out.
Can't wait to find out the cause--Christine, did you retry it on the same
paper with no sizing? And, if it is not getting dark enough, are you
exposing enough? Is it not getting dark enough because it is washing out of
the unsuitable paper?
Chris

> Since I have made quite a few argyrotypes and VanDyke Brown prints last
> year, I may put in my 0,02 cents.
> I found argyrotype very simple (just brush n' go) or quite difficult,
paper
> plays definitely big role. I suspect (not tested - this waits for this
year)
> that quantity of Tween must be fine tuned for every paper, maybe even for
> different moisture content. I have excelent examples of completely
> "failured" pictures. Let say on Fabriano Artistico (no good for cyanotypes
> too) or Fabriano 5 - almost complete picture was flooded from the paper in
> wash phase, only a faint picture is visible (but anyhow pictures is
> interesting in one way - very different from OK ones). Fabriano 4 or
> Fabriano 6 is better but the contrast is weak (low D-max). Then I tried
> almost every paper I can get in local art shop. Some works, some not.
> Sometimes I managed to make argyrotypes, which is almost identical with
> VanDyke's and I have problems to recognize which is which.
> On the other day I made good ones until a day or two later they fades
> consideraby.
> (Oh I forgot to check the phase of the moon on that days!!).
> Anyway, some of them is quite OK, asnd I am pleased with.
>
> Van Dyke Brown print is for me more consistent, almost no waste prints,
> better Dmax on different papers.
>
> Regards from Slovenia
> Stane Kocar
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Sandy King <sanking@clemson.edu>
> To: <alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca>
> Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2004 6:27 AM
> Subject: Argyrotype
>
>
> > Chris wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >I'm puzzled by problems with, since it was the easiest of all
> > >processes with me, almost brush n' go. However, I used absorbent
papers,
> > >not sized ones, and I betcha Judy is right, that the solution is
sitting
> on
> > >top of the surface instead of being absorbed enough before exposure. I
> used
> > >Rives, Buxton, vellum, and others and altho the Buxton was wonderful
> (less
> > >grainy than Rives), for the price it was not worth the hassle. Both
> papers
> > >are nicely absorbent, and I have never felt the need to size, and
gotten
> > >very dark darks. My solution was exactly the same as...Christines' was
> it?
> > >And no added sulfamic. Is, btw, the silvering out a bronzing, perhaps,
> as
> > >appears in other processes? Anyway, go out and buy a sheet of Rives
and
> > >give it a whirl.
> > >
> > >To get specific, Ware says sizing should be aquapel or alkyletene (sp)
> dimer
> > >sized.
> > >chris
> >
> >
> > Well, I am certainly not surprised that someone has had trouble with
> > argyrotype. I tried this process with literally dozens of papers and
> > I never got anything close to decent Dmax with any of them. And if
> > the terribly expensive Buxton is the only paper in the world that
> > works decently with the process one would be much better off in terms
> > of expense to just make palladiums or platinums.
> >
> > And besides, I can never spell the process correctly unless someone
> > leads me into it and I can cut and paste from their message, as I
> > have done here!!
> >
> > Sandy King
> >
>
>
Received on Thu Jan 8 09:34:13 2004