[pure-silver] Re: Paraformaldehyde/Acetone in lith developers
- From: Robert Hall <robert.g.hall@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2010 08:29:09 -0700
Tim,
I would most certainly agree that most developers are similar. the changes I
have seen are slight contrast changes but as the developers tend to go off
so quickly the effects would be hard to show in tests. I have found that
with the method of toning I use on these prints as with any toner I suppose,
has to do with the topological levels of silver in the print. Since the
galleries are all about consistency with unique pieces of art (ouy!) I want
to make sure the toning is as close to the same across the portfolio.
I typically print using the LD-20 which has recently gone up to $30 for a 1
liter box which comes out to about $1 a print. Ouch. I keep the developer
around 80F and dilute the LD to 30ml of developer per liter. This gives me a
print anywhere from 3 to 6 minutes typically and towards the end of the
developer life, about 15 minutes. Beyond that the contrast of the print
starts to muddy and while it still liths well it doesn't render a usable
print -- in this case. Of course the tones become a bit warmer as the
developer ages. I can use the developer for about 15-20 prints in about 6 to
8 hours and then it is time for a new batch.
The work I did in China has been captured via my Mamiya 7II, a 6x7 negative
and my 8x10, yes, sorry, which was quite a bear to carry due to all the
glass. Since I have decided I only need a couple of lenses and life has
become much easier on the distant treks. :) In actuality, the 12x20 is
easier to carry as I only allow myself one lens and 2 film holders. That is
unless my faithful (and lovely) shirpa, Tiffany, has graciously come along.
Cheers,
Robert Hall
www.RobertHall.com
> Off topic, what format did you use for your China work? Presumably not your
> ULF?
>
>
>
> Tim
>
>
>
> *From:* pure-silver-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:
> pure-silver-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] *On Behalf Of *Robert Hall
> *Sent:* 01 March 2010 15:29
>
> *To:* pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> *Subject:* [pure-silver] Re: Paraformaldehyde/Acetone in lith developers
>
>
>
> Thank you all for your knowledge and input,
>
> Could one say that the majority of commercially available lith developers
> use paraformaldehyde? Any speculation as to which of the developers will
> last longer in the tray?
>
> As I have been reprinting my China portfolio for a couple of shows I have
> scheduled this Spring, I have been running through a lot of lith developer
> and the costs have been a bit higher than I have been used to spending.
>
> After the last batch with new prices on a particular lith developer, the
> cost has risen to about a dollar a print for development alone.
>
> In the past I have had much less expensive developers and a broader
> selection available and have for probably about 10 years thought of trying
> other formula, but as I have all of the chemicals available, I have
> forgotten what I have spent on them. I suppose the first experiments will
> simply be to see how well the different formula work then doing the
> calculations after the fact to see what the costs of each are in relation to
> performance.
>
> I will stay with my current processes for consistency on the portfolio but
> have a decent amount of the paper left and would like to find an active
> developer to keep me from spending 30 minutes processing a print from
> exposure through development.
>
> Thank you again,
>
> Robert Hall
> www.RobertHall.com
>
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 8.5.435 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2707 - Release Date: 02/28/10
> 19:34:00
>
Other related posts:
