Re: palladium drydown and developer

From: TERRYAKING_at_aol.com
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2006 12:00:16 -0400 (EDT)
Message-id: <4bb.52baf64.31f25410@aol.com>

In a message dated 21/7/06 4:39:45 pm, zphoto@montana.net writes:

> So I printed the image in gum,
> and then returned to printing a layer of pd on top of the gum (I know that
> doesn't make a bit of sense since the surface is now even more glossy, but I
> wanted to experiment with the King process outlined in View Camera mag), and
> I printed it at 17 minutes.  It worked but has a tendency in the developer
> even at that gross exposure to wash off the gum layer. That makes logical
> sense, I guess, but for some reason I was thinking it'd behave like gum and
> be more tenacious with further exposure.
>

Chris

It sounds as if you did not apply the gelatine layer on top of the gum before
applying the platinum.

it is my experience that a gelatine size improves the perceived acuity of the
platinum print. I infer from this that it is the combination of the gelatine
and the paper that gives the improved appearance.

It is difficult to day whether the exposure was gross as I do not know the
light source or the density of the negative.

Terry
Received on 07/21/06-10:01:00 AM Z

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : 08/31/06-12:23:48 PM Z CST