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

Thanks Judy,

This issue also was brought into my conversation with Mike Ware. See
below:

---- start of quotation ---

Loris:
> ...since there's not any silver nitrate dissolving effect over
elemental
> silver, the particles may be slightly bigger in Argyrotype when
> compared to Vandyke -

Mike:
I have no knowledge of, or information on, particle size determinations
in these prints, so cannot comment.

Loris:
> therefore exhibiting less surface area to pollutants / oxidisers... On

> the other hand; since you said silver nitrate does so in acidic
> environment, Kallitype - which is developed in alkali environment
> - remains protected from silver nitrate's effect over elemental
> silver.)...

Mike:
But kallitype, as I understand it, is 'developed', whereas Van Dyke and
Argyrotype 'print out': processes which also tend to affect particle
size. In the absence of any known facts, these particle size arguments
are too speculative for me.

---- end of quotation ---

Regards,
Loris.

-----Original Message-----
From: Judy Seigel [mailto:jseigel@panix.com]
Sent: 24 Mart 2006 Cuma 08:10
To: alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca
Subject: 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 01:56:31 2006