Re: the old and the new cyanotype formulae

From: Judy Seigel ^lt;[email protected]>
Date: 05/26/04-06:08:29 PM Z
Message-id: <>

On Wed, 26 May 2004, Christina Z. Anderson wrote:

> My question: what is it about the new formula, aside from greater
> expense and more trouble mixing (certainly at time of use it is easier
> because you DON'T have to mix two parts up), that people object to--what are
> the new formula's problems that keep people from using it, aside from habit
> (the if it ain't broke, don't fix it reason)? I really am interested in an
> "I HATE the new cyanotype because..." kind of thing. I keep thinking there
> must be something I am missing. Contrast? Detail in shadows? Anything?
> Chris

I think Loris has pretty much got it... and I suspect that most/many folks
DON'T have that blue water problem (I'd never heard of it til we were
offered the cure, and never saw it mentioned in the literature), but one
added point: Apparently the "new" uses much more poisonous chemicals than
the "old," or so it is said.

Received on Wed May 26 18:08:38 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 06/04/04-01:20:54 PM Z CST