RE: New Cyanotype

From: Loris Medici ^lt;[email protected]>
Date: 05/14/04-04:42:11 AM Z
Message-id: <003901c439a0$258f85d0$ce02500a@altinyildiz.boyner>

Tom, Rick & Scott thanks for your answers.

You all say it's very paper sensitive and I have to try many papers in
order to find one that works fine... Well, this is bad news for me
because we don't have much paper choices here. Rick thank you for
pointing to the mixing instructions change; I was worried about the K
ferricyanide grinding step - now I feel better. Scott, I never had any
bleeding and/or staining with the classic formula (actually with the
paper I'm currently using, had staining in one case when I was using
another paper - I quit that paper immediately). The fact that you didn't
have a dmax equal to or greater than double coated classic is bad news
to me; I hope my experience will be different.

Actually I like the look of double coated classic cyanotype. My problem
with it is that it takes long to coat twice. Also, I'm suspecting that
coating twice is abrading the paper and maybe I'm loosing some
definition (one can notice many fibers by close inspection). So the idea
of coating the new cyanotype once and getting dmax equal to or better
than double coated classic cyanotype is very appealing to me (if it
works that way!). Otherwise, I don't need to bother with the new
cyanotype. Classic cyanotype will do the job: Yes, I the exposures are
long. Yes, you need too much over exposure. Yes, too much exposed
sensitizer wash off the paper. But in the end, I can get a satisfactory
print with the classic formula; and this is what counts primarily.

Thanks to all again for sharing experience and tips.

Received on Fri May 14 10:25:18 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 06/04/04-01:20:53 PM Z CST