[pure-silver] was Another one, now single weight...
- From: "bill h" <vintagebill@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 21:04:35 -0500
Ben,
For me, single weight is less expensive, easier to handle, quick to dry on
ferrotype. My practice/habit has been to make 20 or 30 "work" prints during
a printing session, and eventually to edit them, examine them, have them
around as I decide to make "finished" prints. Finished prints are usually on
double weight, but as often as not if an 8x10 is desired (mostly what I
print is 8x10) I will do that also on single weight.
I have more or less tuned my photography to take advantage of the range of
shadow detail I find in ferrotyped prints. I've used Polycontrast F or its
successors since the late '60s, and changing my rhythms of work as well as
the nature of my negatives to work better with matte paper I think may be
difficult. I've ordered some matte surface single weight. we'll see.
bill h
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ben R. McRee" <ben.mcree@xxxxxxxxx>
To: <pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, December 13, 2004 3:00 PM
Subject: [pure-silver] Re: Another one...
> Bill,
>
> Would you be willing to share with us your reasons for prefering the
> single weight? I'm just curious.
>
> --Ben
>
--
=============================================================================================================
To unsubscribe from this list, go to www.freelists.org and logon to your
account (the same e-mail address and password you set-up when you subscribed,)
and unsubscribe from there.
Other related posts:
- » [pure-silver] was Another one, now single weight...
