Repost: Kallitype,notes on
Judy Seigel (jseigel@panix.com)
Tue, 9 May 1995 15:01:30 -0400 (EDT)
Hello again : A thousand apologies for the junk in my last. Here is a
cleaned-up version (I hope) courtesy of a kind friend. What happened was,
we're planting this code in the brains of photographers world wide, and
in my inexperience at uploading I let it out. SORRY! Judy
>
> Hello altphotoprocessers -- and Adam Kimball.
>
> Hi Adam, are you still out there -- or did you graduate? I've been
> following your saga in the year's archive, waiting to post until I saw
> how it all came out. Alas, listproc. refuses to give me Mar. 26
> through April 18, no matter how I pretty-please it, but, assuming
> there were no major breakthroughs in that time, I think I have some
> useful comments.
>
> First, though, you are all amazing! Roses and joy to everyone who
> contributed to a remarkable document -- human and scientific.
>
> As for kallitype - in my moderately informed, but no doubt
> insufficiently humble, opinion, a lot of your trouble, Adam, came from
> too much faith in a certain UNdefinitive book. Aside from the
> maddening and confusing repetitions and contradictions, it leaves out
> a lot that's pertinent, barks up a lot of wrong trees, and says much
> that just isn't true. (My not dwelling on these points further is an
> act of superhuman restraint, which I don't even attempt in person,
> since any mention of this book starts me frothing. But, seeing how
> wonderfully, inspiringly, kind and civil this list is, I don't want to
> be a bad person on my first post.)
>
> The BEST single kallitype developer I found was Bostick and Sullivan's
> Ammonium Citrate liquid developer, which, last time I bought it, cost
> about $8 a litre plus shipping. And it comes ready mixed. Don't know
> if it gives the "chocolate" color Adam is looking for (is that bakers
> chocolate, milk chocolate, or sweet German chocolate, Adam?), but it
> is a very pleasant, often rosy, brown, which, as always, varies with
> the paper and other processing details. It is, however, just about
> glitch-proof, gives smooth, fine grain, tends not to need further
> clearing on hard papers, and, just like the old (platinum) manuals
> promise, lasts forever. That is, when it gets dark, let it settle,
> decant the clear part, and dispose (properly) of the sludge. It won't
> go bad, just add more when volume is low.
>
> As for those Rochelle salts developers, I, too, found it nearly
> impossible to get all the chemicals into solution -- but we're willing
> to suffer for our art, right? Trouble was that, even after all the
> weighing and stirring, I never got the promised variations of color.
> Also, though I didn't test EACH variation, the ones I did try didn't
> last well. If you re-use them (sometimes, as I recall, just the 2nd
> time, and that's a fair amount of money and stirring for one printing
> session), they ruin the print (grainy and faded) and you're right back
> at the mixing table.
>
> HOWEVER, ammonium citrate developer's bright brown was too bright on
> my paper (an old Strathmore Drawing). Sodium acetate, easy to mix and
> reusable , was excellent. That's 75 g sodium acetate & 3 g tartaric
> acid per litre. I'd mix a gallon at double strength, then add an
> equal amount of water and the tartaric acid (3 grams is about 1/2 tsp)
> at time of use.
>
> For contrast controls, one drop of 7% potassium dichromate per 50
> drops emulsion was about the limit before highlights got grainy, but
> it brought the CR down to 8 steps (from 12 or so) on the 21-step. OR,
> add 1/2 cc (10 drops) 7% potassium dichromate per litre to the
> developer. Either way, no further clearing was necessary. (Of course
> both formulas lighten the image; expose accordingly.)
>
> For ferric oxalate, I found Bostick & Sullivan's dry powder the best
> "solution," cheaper than buying and shipping liquid and seems (so far)
> to keep indefinitely; I made it up over time in 4 batches. For 25%
> solution, stir 12 1/2 grams into 40 cc distilled water in a beaker,
> stirring at intervals for ca. 1/2 hour, then pour into brown dropper
> bottle, using a final 10 cc of distilled to slosh out the residue in
> the beaker. (If all won't fit, store part in tightly sealed bottle in
> fridge.) Agitate the bottle occasionally over the next 12 hours or so.
> The powder WILL go into solution -- the cloudy greenish liquid WILL
> become clear and brownish -- though it looks like it won't. You can
> heat the liquid to speed things up (microwave OK), but don't boil.
>
> Note that the classic potassium ferricyanide test for freshness of FO
> doesn't work with the B&S powder, which I learned after throwing out a
> bunch. Marilyn Bostick said the only risk with old FO is it won't
> clear, but what IS the risk of non-clearing? They say iron residue in
> paper degrades the silver, but they say lots of things. Depending on
> the negative and the paper, the "stain" can give a rather charming
> "antique" look. Is it risky? Also, is iron residue always visible
> right off (unlike fixer residue)? Anybody?
>
> For clearing bath when needed, either EDTA or 10% citric acid was OK,
> others degraded the image.
>
> For fixer, 55 grams of sodium thiosulfate (2 heaping tablespoons) per
> litre of water with 10 cc non-sudsy household ammonia lightened the
> print least. But fix for how long? I fix for no more than 2 agitating
> minutes and in 8 years have seen no fading. (But the 9th year?) In my
> heart I think all VDB and kallitype formulas tell you to overfix (they
> say 5 to 10 minutes), with a real loss of richness, but my attempts to
> test for residual silver have been ignominious. The only formula I
> found was: 1 part Kodak Rapid Selenium to 9 parts water. Squeegee
> print. Put drop on highlight area; blot after 2-3 minutes. If color is
> other than creamy (it says), unfixed silver remains. So my tests all
> turned bright selenium-red -- even in borders with no emulsion. Any
> suggestions, formulae, out there?
>
> The Kodak H-2 formula test for residual hypo, OTH, was very clear and
> distinct and quite at odds with the "info" in ---- oops, said I
> wouldn't!
>
> To lighten a too-dark print, bathe it in (or swab with) HCL in from
> 1/2% to 2% solution. Muriatic acid (construction grade HCL) is $6 a
> gallon at the hardware store. (It's going to be 99% tap water anyway.)
>
> Other papers that looked good with Kallitype were Saunders #72,
> softer, but a beautiful purply brown with the B&S. developer;
> Stonehenge was also a great color; Fabriano Artistico was black and
> beautiful with the sodium acetate developer; the old Strathmore
> Artists 500 series was excellent, but I don't know about the new.
>
> Finally, let me say: I have no interest in Bostick & Sullivan! In fact
> I once peeved Richard mightily by criticising his spelling and
> punctuation.(Hi Richard! Seems you got a spell checker. Have been
enjoying your -too rare - posts; will comment shortly.) >
> Cheers, Judy Seigel, NYC
>
>
>
>
>