Re: myths and magic

You should be able to see the images at:

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/david.j.harris2/Alt%20process%20prints/Cyanotype%20Rex/

Does that work?

David
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jusdado" <jusdado@teleline.es>
To: <alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca>
Sent: Monday, July 24, 2006 4:28 PM
Subject: Re: myths and magic

> David & Jan Harris escribió:
> > Hi Loris
> >
> > Agreed. You didn't make any such assertions. But someone else
misinterpreted
> > what was said somewhere on the thread. For example, here is a quote:
> >
> >
> >> Given that some people may
> >> prefer a low contrast image (including Terry) the process may be fine,
> >> however Terry has neatly avoided the fact the one could never get any
> >>
> > other
> >
> >> result.
> >>
> >
> > On lists such as this it is easy for people to misinterpret other's
> > conjecture/observations based on limited data, and very rapidly myths
grow
> > to the point that they become accepted facts. Often, there is no one
person
> > at fault. Its a bit like chinese whispers.
> >
> > I don't believe that Terry has ever claimed that Cy-Rex is better than
trad
> > (or new).
> >
> > Nor do I. I simply say that I can get better results with Cy-Rex. Side
by
> > side the Cy-Rex prints look better. I haven't tried new, so can't
comment on
> > that.
> >
> > You are also right about judging prints on the web. I could scan some of
my
> > trad cyanotypes and you would not be able to see much, if any,
difference.
> > Probably the biggest difference is that they would look more cyan, less
> > blue.
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > David
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Loris Medici" <mail@loris.medici.name>
> > To: <alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca>
> > Sent: Sunday, July 23, 2006 9:11 PM
> > Subject: RE: myths and magic
> >
> >
> >
> >> Hi David,
> >>
> >> I never made the "assertions" you list below. I just asked Terry if he
can
> >> show us more contrasty samples with better Dmax, but he failed to do so

> >>
> > and
> >
> >> suspiciously trashed new cyanotype (as if he gots some serious problems
> >>
> > with
> >
> >> Mike Ware). Your prints look very nice, albeit I must admit that I
don't
> >>
> > see
> >
> >> anything that cannot be done with new cyanotype (of course this is just
by
> >> looking scans - and we all know that scans may be quite misleading, I
wish
> >>
> > I
> >
> >> could hold them in my hands). Anyway, thank you for sharing your
> >>
> > experience
> >
> >> with the cyanotype rex process. I just ordered the .PDF (thanks to your
> >> message - BTW for Peter: I never thought to ask for a free copy even
for a
> >> review...), will try it (probably communicating extensively with Terry)
> >>
> > and
> >
> >> see it for myself (with digital negatives, I may also shoot some 6x6
> >> negatives for testing in-camera negatives - unfortunately I can't shoot
> >> anyting bigger than this).
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Loris.
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: David & Jan Harris [mailto:david.j.harris2@ntlworld.com]
> >> Sent: 23 Temmuz 2006 Pazar 19:57
> >> To: alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca
> >> Subject: Rex: myths and magic
> >>
> >> Some interesting myths about Cyanotype Rex seem to be circulating on
this
> >> list:
> >>
> >> 1. The process lacks Dmax.
> >> 2. The process is inherently flat.
> >>
> >> I have seen quite a few Cyanotype Rex prints over the past 18 months or
> >>
> > so,
> >
> >> and envying them greatly. Despite the fact that many of them have been
> >> bleached slightly (to reduce the depth of blue), they all had much
greater
> >> Dmax than my traditional cyanotypes (which had never looked weak in
> >> isolation). So there goes myth number 1. It will be interesting to see
> >> Loris' views on Rex v New cyanotype insofar as Dmax. I would be
surprised
> >>
> > if
> >
> >> Rex loses that battle.
> >>
> >> The prints I've been admiring were made from negatives suited to salt
> >> prints. The photographer concerned, who is most definitely not digital,
> >> found this to be a great advantage as he could use the same negative
for
> >> both processes. In fact, he has come to prefer Rex for his style of
> >> photography.
> >>
> >> Jan and I have been trying out Cyanotype Rex for just a few weeks,
using
> >> digital negs. One thing we found is that it does require a high density
> >> digital neg, even greater than we needed for POP, and certainly greater
> >>
> > than
> >
> >> Pt/Pd or trad cyanotype. Those who use PDN will understand what I mean
> >>
> > when
> >
> >> I say that we got nowhere near a white square when printing the colour
> >> density range palette (on Epson 2100 with +15 ink config). So we use
black
> >> ink printing.
> >>
> >> So far as myth #2, this does suggest that the process is quite low
> >>
> > contrast.
> >
> >> However, I have never heard anyone when talking about salt prints say
in a
> >> derogatory way that the process lacks contrast. When the negative is
> >>
> > matched
> >
> >> to the process prints display plenty of contrast, believe me. Like
> >> traditional cyanotypes, prints can flatten up when toned, but they can
> >>
> > also
> >
> >> gain contrast depending on the technique. I suspect I could get a white
> >> square on the CDRP now if I tried it. It might be worth a try.
> >>
> >> Initially we obtained great results, then we ran into a problem with
grain
> >> and reversal. This took a few weeks to fix, but finally we did so. The
> >> culprit was a dodgy batch of one of the chemicals. So its fair to say
that
> >> the process is sensitive to poor quality chemicals. Not unlike most
other
> >> processes. In fact, I identified the cause when the same chemical gave
> >>
> > weak
> >
> >> traditional cyanotypes. I should have realised that the solid didn't
look
> >> quite right.
> >>
> >> If people are interested, some of our prints are at
> >>
> >>
> >
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/david.j.harris2/Alt%20process%20prints/Cyanotyp
> >
> >> e%20Rex/
> >>
> >> If some of these look grainy, its because of the aforementioned grain
> >> problem.
> >>
> >> David
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> > Hello to all,
> > not you for that it causes cannot see their impressions.
> > it could clarify the address www.
> > Thank you
> > pardon for my English, text translated by computer.
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
Received on 07/24/06-10:05:57 AM Z