RE: UV exposure light boxes/Solar plate

From: Baird, Darryl ^lt;[email protected]>
Date: 02/07/04-05:58:23 PM Z
Message-id: <37885B2630DF0C4CA95EFB47B30985FB04525D05@Exchange-1.umflint.edu>

I may be butting in incorrectly, I think I deleted all previous
posts...bad week, little time to ramble through the list's traffic.

However, if you're looking for solar plate/aquatint info, I did find a
new danish site (no Mark, not food!) worth looking at -
http://www.artbag.dk/ge/uk/index.html

Strange Ross concluded a double exposure (each different for
screen/image) released him from worrying about differences between
polymer batches and he used it exclusively (as of 1998). I thought he
had moved to a single exposure, but poor memory prevails.

yes, I found him again... http://www.psy.ku.dk/ross/index.html

he offers notes on both aproaches, plus some truely lovely work. Over
the years I visited Strange's site and found his command of the
materials has increased incredibly.

Darryl

-----Original Message-----
From: Ender100@aol.com [mailto:Ender100@aol.com]
Sent: Sat 2/7/2004 2:46 PM
To: alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca
Subject: Re: UV exposure light boxes/Solar plate
 
It is a little more complicated here since you have the two exposures
to
calculate, one for the screen and one for the image. I think I would
keep the
ratio of the two exposures the same and reduce both by an equivalent
percent to
get closer to standard exposure. Is there a standard ratio of
exposure for
Image/Screen? There has to be an optimum ratio for a given exposure
source,
screen density, and solarplate material type (I think there is more
than one
type of material that can be used to make the plate.) If I
understand
correctly, the post exposure hardens the final developed image, so
that doesn't affect
anything as long as it is suffecient to do the hardening job.

Proecesses that also have a mechanical development variable like this
and gum
and others get tricky when trying to keep variables constant.

Going back to my other post, if you had steps 1,2, &3 merging, then at
least
you know have have given enough exposure, and all you need to do to
get to a
standard exposure is back off 1/2 stop to get just steps 1&2 merging.
>From
there you can back off by a "partial half stop that makes you happy"
to get
differentiation also between steps 1 and 2.

Just some thoughts on it, I've never done the process, so what do I
know?
hehehehe But I would be interested if this approach to getting to your
standard
exposure value might be appropriate-comments and criticisms welcome.

Mark Nelson
Guard Against The Embarrassment of Wardrobe Failure!
a new book by Janet Jackson, the most recent victim of this syndrome!
"I never dreamed that I would ever fall victim to this affliction!
Especially at the Superboob, er, uh Superbowl!"-J Jackson

In a message dated 2/7/04 12:22:30 PM, jpptprnt@verizon.net writes:

> Mark,
>
> In talking with David he said to try and do 1min30sec to 2min screen
and see
> what happens I may try that next week to much to dothis week end.
>
> Jan
>

Received on Sat Feb 7 18:04:57 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 03/02/04-11:35:08 AM Z CST