> You wrote:
>
> >fibers as much. Absorbant papers such as RIVES BFK for example produce
> >contrasty cyanotypes whereas ARCHES EN TU CAS, a heavily sized paper,
> >produces a very long extended range of values in cyanotype.
> >
>
> RIVES BFK has to receive additional sizing or else the image,
> cyanotype or whatever, is so well absorbed that it loses
> resolution badly. With all the elaborate sizings out there, I've
Ok, here's My experience with unsized papers. I use BFK Rives roll paper
(to my knowledge still the only waterleaf Rives) and Arches 88, both of
which are rich waterleaf (unsized) papers. I make cyanotypes with these
papers. I have not found them to lose resolution at all, but they do
produce prints that are rich in texture and quite contrasty. They almost
rival a gelatin silver print in scale. Most people really love the way
they look.
I coat the paper from the BACK, and it soaks up solution like a blotter.
The fibers filter the solution, so what appears on the front side is
perfectly pure. Getting them dry fast is tricky; I usually resort to
infrared bulbs in a negative pressure box. The resultant paper is unable
to lie flat by itself, and has to be exposed in a vacuum frame or a tight
print frame.
Washing them takes quite awhile, and they must be washed absolutely clean
or the whites (especially the paper surrounding the coated area) will
degrade. These papers are tough and hold up well. I wash them in a tray
washer (like the Prinz, water comes in one end, out holes in the other).
I dry them on screens or hang them with clothes pins.
You can see some of these prints reproduced in the up and coming issue of
Pinhole Journal. You may think that because they are pinhole I wouldn't
know that the resolution is holding, but that's not true. My pinholes
are very sharp. Most people don't know they are pinhole images, and
don't see any lack of resolution.
Give it a try and let me know how it works for you.
Larry Bullis
Shoreline Community College