RE: 1st & 2nd Cyanotype

I must add that less paper abrasion occurs with better brushes... The issue
is not just wasting noble metal.

-----Original Message-----
From: Loris Medici [mailto:mail@loris.medici.name]
Sent: 21 Temmuz 2006 Cuma 22:42
To: alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca
Subject: RE: 1st & 2nd Cyanotype

The problem with Richeson and Da Vinci brushes is; once you use them, you
don't want to use anything else... ;) Price is irrelevant to me (my 2" Da
Vinci's costed me $9 each - in Turkey, I bet it's cheaper in the
States/Canada) because I use them since 2003 - no signs of deterioration
(except few cracks in the finish). Before them, I was using pebeo wash
brushes (student quality stuff), they rust easily and paint chips off
quickly (chips drops on the coated paper). Rust is evil with iron processes
(it cause streaks).

Regards,
Loris.

-----Original Message-----
From: Camden Hardy [mailto:camden@hardyphotography.net]
Sent: 21 Temmuz 2006 Cuma 22:28
To: alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca
Subject: Re: 1st & 2nd Cyanotype

I agree. I've been using a $3 hake (2") and it's been just fine.

Camden Hardy

camden@hardyphotography.net
http://www.hardyphotography.net

On Fri, July 21, 2006 1:22 pm, ryberg wrote:
> I really doubt you need to use really expensive brushes with cyano,
> either type. With nobel metals the cost saving is worth it, but for
> the slight waste if cyano, a $5 or $10 brush is fine. I do agree that
> generally the foam brushes cause more harm than good.
> Charles Portland, OR
>
>
Received on 07/21/06-01:47:08 PM Z