Sandy,
You should not grant such ignorance a reply. Simply add Mr LIHON to your
email kill list and press the delete button.
My experiences with the argyrotype (and the enhanced cyanotype for that
matter) were not dissimilar to yours. I quickly reverted to traditional
methods, finding them more reliable.
Regards,
Peter Marshall
Photography Guide at About http://photography.about.com/
email: photography.guide@about.com
_________________________________________________________________
London's Industrial Heritage: http://petermarshallphotos.co.uk/
The Buildings of London etc: http://londonphotographs.co.uk/
My London Diary http://mylondondiary.co.uk/
and elsewhere......
>
> --Boundary_(ID_ruuR1ow9JVNqv+Jgys6Y9Q)
> Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=us-ascii
> Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
>
> In a recent message to the alt-photo-process list I wrote the following:
>
> "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!!"
>
> Today I received an off-list message from an apparent list lurker,
> suggesting that two conclusions were self evident, one "you have been
> doing something wrong", or 2) "you have been working with faulty
> materials." The message went on to suggest that I "refrain from
> gratuitously slagging-off proven processes in public, until you have
> actually achieved an understanding of your materials, and can use
> them correctly?" The message ended with a nasty personal cheap shot.
> Since the person in question does not participate in this list I will
> identify him only as someone, who suffers from the not uncommon
> affliction known as LIHOM, i.e. "Legend in His/Her Own Mind, a rather
> pathetic illness first described by the famous American cowboy Clint
> Eastwood.
>
> In an off-list answer to Mr. LIHON I addressed the issue of
> argyrotype as follows:
>
> "I had some initial success with argyrotypee but my resulting
> experiences have proven it be extremely paper sensitive. The process
> simply did not give satisfactory results with the great majority of
> papers that I tried, and I tried a great many.
>
> My conclusion is that since I am capable of making very nice prints
> with a number of processes, including carbon, kallitype, vandyke and
> pt/pd, the fact that I was not able to do so with argyrotype, in
> spite of a considerable investment of time, is proof certain that any
> advantages of the process relative to vandyke and other forms of
> kallitype are far outweighed by its drawbacks. That is my opinion and
> I will continue to express it as I see fit."
>
> And to Mr. LIHON, should he be listening, may I suggest medication
> for an inflated EGO.
>
> Sandy King
>
> --Boundary_(ID_ruuR1ow9JVNqv+Jgys6Y9Q)
> Content-type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
> Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
>
> <!doctype html public "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
> <html><head><style type="text/css"><!--
> blockquote, dl, ul, ol, li { padding-top: 0 ; padding-bottom: 0 }
> --></style><title>Argyrotype</title></head><body>
> <div><font face="Times" size="+1" color="#000000">In a recent message
> to the alt-photo-process list I wrote the following:</font><br>
> </div>
> <div><font face="Times" size="+1" color="#000000">"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.<br>
> <br>
> 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!!"<br>
> <br>
> Today I received an off-list message from an apparent list lurker,
> suggesting that two conclusions were self evident, one "you have
> been doing something wrong", or 2) "you have been working with
> faulty materials." The message went on to suggest that I "refrain
> from gratuitously slagging-off proven processes in public, until you
> have actually achieved an understanding of your materials, and can use
> them correctly?" The message ended with a nasty personal cheap
> shot. Since the person in question does not participate in this list I
> will identify him only as someone, who suffers from the not uncommon
> affliction known as LIHOM, i.e. "Legend in His/Her Own Mind, a
> rather pathetic illness first described by the famous American cowboy
> Clint Eastwood.<br>
> <br>
> In an off-list answer to Mr. LIHON I addressed the issue of
> argyrotype as follows:<br>
> <br>
> "I had some initial success with argyrotypee but my resulting
> experiences have proven it be extremely paper sensitive. The process
> simply did not give satisfactory results with the great majority of
> papers that I tried, and I tried a great many.<br>
> <br>
> My conclusion is that since I am capable of making very nice prints
> with a number of processes, including carbon, kallitype, vandyke and
> pt/pd, the fact that I was not able to do so with argyrotype, in spite
> of a considerable investment of time, is proof certain that any
> advantages of the process relative to vandyke and other forms of
> kallitype are far outweighed by its drawbacks. That is my opinion and
> I will continue to express it as I see fit."<br>
> <br>
> And to Mr. LIHON, should he be listening, may I suggest medication for
> an inflated EGO.<br>
> <br>
> Sandy King<br>
> </font></div>
> </body>
> </html>
>
> --Boundary_(ID_ruuR1ow9JVNqv+Jgys6Y9Q)--
>
>
Received on Sat Jan 10 12:22:34 2004
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 02/02/04-09:49:58 AM Z CST