Re: silvery sheen & fisheyes

From: Clay Harmon ^lt;>
Date: 01/08/04-11:22:34 AM Z
Message-id: <>

Is the sheen only in the deep shadowed areas? If so, I'm guessing it
may be like the so-called bronzing that you can sometimes get when
printing palladium. It seems to be caused by too much light hitting too
little sensitizer/metal. In palladium printing, it can be usually be
solved by double coating and being very careful not to overexpose. I
have run into the same problem occasionally with VDB's made with very
high contrast negatives where the deep shadow areas were really blasted
with UV in order to get the highlights to print with some detail.
Usually toning prior to fixing would take care of the problem.

On Jan 8, 2004, at 11:11 AM, epona wrote:

> hmm. perhaps i should have mentioned this sheen was not visible until
> the print dried - while wet, it looked pretty darn good. i air-dried
> it overnight.
> thx,
> ~christine
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> ~~~~~~~~~~~
> "Crazy" is a term of art: "Insane" is a term of Law. Remember that,
> and you will save yourself a lot of trouble.
> ~ Hunter S. Thompson
> On Jan 7, 2004, at 10:33 PM, Judy Seigel wrote:
>> On Thu, 8 Jan 2004, Kate Mahoney wrote:
>>> To add to this - I've been watching for fish-eyes since this
>>> discussion
>>> began - I get them, but because I use a roller to smooth off the
>>> coat, they
>>> disappear entirely. I agree with Dave on this, another brushing will
>>> get rid
>> I'm not sure what fish eyes are -- don't think I've seen them. But I
>> wonder -- has anyone who put a drop of Kremer anti-foam in the gelatin
>> gotten fish eyes?
>> Then about the silvering on the argyrotype... There may be no
>> connection,
>> but -- we found that VDB never silvered out when it wasn't heat
>> dried...
>> tho it often did (depending on paper and contrast) when it was heat
>> dried.
>> There was quite a literature on the papers that did & didn't "plate
>> out"
>> but it didn't happen when air dried at room temp.
>> Though this problem may not be that problem, I realize.
>> J.
Received on Thu Jan 8 11:20:41 2004

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