palladium comparison -- Was: making pictures

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hmmm. Maybe there's a big difference between the usual palladium processing and the (seemingly) simpler Ziatype method introduced by Sullivan (of Bostick and Sullivan). Could you elaborate some regarding "more involved and expensive" ? The chemistry and paper coating is much simpler, at least. No?

  -yoram


On Sep 27, 2011, at 10:50 PM, Trevor Cunningham wrote:

By iron-based, I'm speaking of cyanotype, vandyke, and kallitype. Trust me that palladium is much more involved and expensive!

On 9/27/11 9:35 PM, YGelmanPhoto wrote:
Trevor's comment is the first time I heard of an iron-based process, so I googled and found this <http://www.alternativephotography.com/wp/alt-proc/alternative-process-photography-and-science-meet-at-the-getty >. Fascinating, but too much to read in a month!

I'm glad the alternative process I'll use most is much less complicated -- making palladium prints. . . . [skip] . . .

 -yoram



[Index of Archives] [Share Photos] [Epson Inkjet] [Scanner List] [Gimp Users] [Gimp for Windows]

  Powered by Linux