Re: FW: An exchange with Mike Ware (on Argyrotype)

On Thu, 23 Mar 2006, Loris Medici wrote:

>....My opinion is that if one process Kallitypes
> and Vandykes so that no thiosulfate (except for a minute trace maybe -
> which may actually provide protection from oxidation) and iron is left
> in the paper, there isn't a reason to think that the stability /
> longevity will be inferior compared to Argyrotype.

At the risk of raising Warean wrath, I cite what I recall, as hasn't been
mentioned in the puzzlement over why Argyro. I remember reading that it
was more archival because the particles were larger -- hence with less
total surface area than the processes it putatively replaced-- for
impurities (or other) to attack.

I can't swear it was argyro, but which other would it have been? Nor can
I swear it was Ware making the claim -- but who else?

Whether the particles are indeed larger, or whether that would matter, I
have no idea, nor does it matter to me personally, as I don't plan to do,
service, write about, teach, or otherwise engage in any of the relevant
processes (famous last words of course) in the forseeable future. I
simply offer the recollection as a public service.

You're welcome.

Judy

>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mike Ware [mailto:mike@mikeware.co.uk]
> Sent: 22 Mart 2006 Çarşamba 12:46
> To: Loris Medici
> Subject: Re: An exchange with Mike Ware (on Argyrotype)
>
> ...
>
> I would like to turn our discussion towards a question of objective
> historical evidence that I find interesting:
> in the photograph collections of the UK, and elsewhere, I have seen many
> salt prints and cyanotypes from the 1840s, and many platinum prints from
> the 1890s on. Yet I do not think I could show you a single Van Dyke or
> Kallitype from 1900-1910, when these processes were supposed to be most
> popular. Have I just missed them? Have you heard of any? If not, what is
> the explanation for their absence? (I have heard the explanation that
> there are many van dykes and kallitypes "out there" pretending to be
> platinotypes - but have you ever seen a shred of evidence for this
> assertion?)
>
> If it interests you, I would be quite happy if you raised the questions
> in this last paragraph publicly.
>
> ...
>
>
Received on Fri Mar 24 00:11:13 2006