Don,
Yes, I have run the acid soak on Stonhenge in the past, but while the
soak increases Dmax it removes some of the coating, even with very
short soak times. This makes it easier for the solution to sink into
the paper, making it necessary to use more solution, and there is
some loss of smoothness.
What is your soaking procedure? And don't you get the above? Never
know for sure with this paper since it is not as consistent as some
of the best papers.
I now have two light sources, a large 12-tube bank 48" BLB tubes, and
a 1200 watt AmerGraph ULF-28 Continuous Wave Xenon. The ULF-28 is a
prototype, similar in details to the NuArc, which I am testing. I
plan to eventually write a review of it once I am sure there are no
problems. I have been testing it off and on now for about two months.
I sold the NuArc 26-1k locally to make room for the ULF-28.
Sandy
>Sandy,
>
>________________________________________
>>
>In using Rising Stonhenge off the shelf with no acid soak I was able to get
>a Dmax of 1.45 with this mixture single coating using about 2.5 ml of
>solution per 8X10 sheet of paper. That is higher than I have been able to
>get in the past single coating Stonhenge using either the regular VDB
>formula, kallitype or palladium. These readings are for native kallitye,
>with no toning.
>>
>
>1.45 is really good DMAX for VDB
>
>Have you acidified Stonehenge in the past for printing VDB? I have been able
>to get a DMAX of 1.5 with pure palladium + NA2 (1s mix).
>
>>
>Printing times to get the first maximum black from a Stouffer Step Wedge
>using this light source (the AmerGraph ULF-28 Continuous Wave Xenon)
>>
>
>So you aren't using the 26k any longer?
>
>
>Don Bryan
>
>
>
Received on 05/17/06-10:02:27 AM Z
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : 06/23/06-10:10:53 AM Z CST