RE: Cyanotype

Thanks for the answer, one more question: (see inline text)

-----Original Message-----
From: TERRYAKING@aol.com [mailto:TERRYAKING@aol.com]
Sent: 15 Şubat 2006 Çarşamba 22:27
To: alt-photo-process-L@usask.ca
Subject: Fwd: Cyanotype

In a message dated 15/02/2006 20:24:36 GMT Standard Time, TERRYAKING
writes:

Loris
"Since you say that Cyanotype-Rex is very fast compared to traditional
formula (to the extent of being able to be used in-camera), I wonder:
1) Do you get a positive image or negative image when used in-camera? If
negative, do you think the density and color will be enough to contact
print the negative onto another Cyanotype-Rex paper (or other process)?"

Terry
"I get a negative image which can then be used to make a contact
positive just as one would with film. (If FP4 goes off the market maybe
I will have a stand by for architectural photography)."

Ok, it's a negative-positive process but I still don't have the answer
of my question: "Do the density and color of the negative provide
sufficient UV blocking so that one can contact print it onto another
Cyanotype-Rex (or other process) paper?" Have you tried it?

Loris
"If positive, since the Cyanotype emulsions we know (both traditional
and new cyanotype) are only sensitive to UV, what would be the purpose
of using of it in camera? I mean one may not take photographs indoors or
UV-poor days (winter, overcast weather) if the -Rex emulsion is only
sensitive to UV like the former variations"

Terry
"Right from the very beginning it has not been true that cyanotype is
only sensitive to UV (see Herschel's notes in the 1840s). At our Oxford
conference, the Object Glass of Science, last September we were getting
three minute exposures under dull cloudy skies. This September we are
combining the conference with APIS 2006."

3 mins. under dull cloudy sky is quite impressive. If your answer to my
previous question is positive, than this is good news...
Received on Wed Feb 15 23:48:19 2006