Re: Argyrotype

From: Stane Kočar ^lt;[email protected]>
Date: 01/08/04-03:42:11 AM Z
Message-id: <00dd01c3d5cb$b0eceb60$0200a8c0@les01>

Since I have made quite a few argyrotypes and VanDyke Brown prints last
year, I may put in my 0,02 cents.
I found argyrotype very simple (just brush n' go) or quite difficult, paper
plays definitely big role. I suspect (not tested - this waits for this year)
that quantity of Tween must be fine tuned for every paper, maybe even for
different moisture content. I have excelent examples of completely
"failured" pictures. Let say on Fabriano Artistico (no good for cyanotypes
too) or Fabriano 5 - almost complete picture was flooded from the paper in
wash phase, only a faint picture is visible (but anyhow pictures is
interesting in one way - very different from OK ones). Fabriano 4 or
Fabriano 6 is better but the contrast is weak (low D-max). Then I tried
almost every paper I can get in local art shop. Some works, some not.
Sometimes I managed to make argyrotypes, which is almost identical with
VanDyke's and I have problems to recognize which is which.
On the other day I made good ones until a day or two later they fades
consideraby.
(Oh I forgot to check the phase of the moon on that days!!).
Anyway, some of them is quite OK, asnd I am pleased with.

Van Dyke Brown print is for me more consistent, almost no waste prints,
better Dmax on different papers.

Regards from Slovenia
Stane Kocar

----- Original Message -----
From: Sandy King <sanking@clemson.edu>
To: <alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca>
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2004 6:27 AM
Subject: Argyrotype

> Chris wrote:
>
> >
> >I'm puzzled by problems with, since it was the easiest of all
> >processes with me, almost brush n' go. However, I used absorbent papers,
> >not sized ones, and I betcha Judy is right, that the solution is sitting
on
> >top of the surface instead of being absorbed enough before exposure. I
used
> >Rives, Buxton, vellum, and others and altho the Buxton was wonderful
(less
> >grainy than Rives), for the price it was not worth the hassle. Both
papers
> >are nicely absorbent, and I have never felt the need to size, and gotten
> >very dark darks. My solution was exactly the same as...Christines' was
it?
> >And no added sulfamic. Is, btw, the silvering out a bronzing, perhaps,
as
> >appears in other processes? Anyway, go out and buy a sheet of Rives and
> >give it a whirl.
> >
> >To get specific, Ware says sizing should be aquapel or alkyletene (sp)
dimer
> >sized.
> >chris
>
>
> Well, I am certainly not surprised that someone has had trouble with
> argyrotype. I tried this process with literally dozens of papers and
> I never got anything close to decent Dmax with any of them. And if
> the terribly expensive Buxton is the only paper in the world that
> works decently with the process one would be much better off in terms
> of expense to just make palladiums or platinums.
>
> And besides, I can never spell the process correctly unless someone
> leads me into it and I can cut and paste from their message, as I
> have done here!!
>
> Sandy King
>
Received on Thu Jan 8 03:41:55 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 02/02/04-09:49:58 AM Z CST