[pure-silver] Re: And you thought your exposures were long
- From: Janet Cull <janetgcull@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2012 08:41:17 -0500
I wondered the same thing. Let's ask him.
On Jan 5, 2012, at 11:58 PM, Peter Badcock wrote:
I wonder why he doesn't fix the image to prevent it being lost in
the scanning process ?
"Even so, with the length of Chrisman’s exposures, the paper is
extremely overexposed. There is no need to use chemicals to bring up
the image. After so long, it is there on its own and visible to the
naked eye. “If I were to try to develop the paper in a traditional
darkroom, the image would be lost,” said Chrisman. Instead, he uses
a scanner to capture the image from the paper, and in doing so,
destroys the paper image itself. “The bright light of the scanner
slowly erases the image, inch by inch, as it captures it.”"
Other related posts:
