Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2009/12/11

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] LUG Digest, Vol 43, Issue 194
From: richard.lists at gmail.com (Richard Man)
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2009 15:58:52 -0800
References: <A4894EBEF30F4042A0C6428F8CF90ADF@SueHome> <C7484142.5A30C%mark@rabinergroup.com>

Somehow I thought you will answer thusly. I am just experimenting
Mark, and certainly a number of people like the ferrotype look.

I did find that apug.org page you reference. Interesting, no one else
there piped up with your admonishing, although I can see your point. I
will mediate on the look.

Let's see:

Tim Rudman, "The Photographer's Master Printing Course:" page 20, he
talks about using the print dryer with not admonishment, except be
careful with how you dry RC vs. fiber. On p137, on disadvantage of a
print dryer, he only mentions be careful on carrying contamination...

The Master Printer's by Steve Macleod, page 78: "...or if you have
access, use a hot flatbed press, which combines hear with wight to
compress the paper."

So while I appreciate your and others vast experience in this subject
of darkroom printing, I don't think there's "one true method."


On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 3:34 PM, Mark Rabiner <mark at rabinergroup.com> 
wrote:
>
> Bon ami powder will make a Ferrotype plate instantly unusable for
> ferrotyping prints ever again which is just fine because you'd not want to
> ever do that anyway or subject your print to heat in any way especially 
> when
> wet. ?Not in three decades. Why not take a class in photography or read a
> book instead of getting into photography by asking questions on email 
> lists?
>
> Ferrotyped prints were popular with wedding photographers in the 50's in
> 60's and enjoyed a brief vogue in the galleries ?for a ?season.
> Sometimes a school darkroom or newsroom darkroom would have one set up
> continuously. You'd have to pre wet your print in a pre ferrotyped solution
> for you to get a non spotted print.
> By the 80's they were spurned by everybody and the RC prints came in for
> such reproduction purposes.
>
> The ferrotype surface was considered maybe ideal for reproduction.
> Not display or serious work.
> But even for reproduction people put the print in ?the dryer emulsion side
> to the canvas as it didn't make much difference and the ultra gloss thing
> was considered annoying on all accounts. A big waste of paper on all
> accounts.
> A thing your photo teacher would tell you the first day of class.
>
> http://www.apug.org/forums/archive/index.php/t-21925.html
>
>
>
> Mark William Rabiner
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>



-- 
// richard m: richard @imagecraft.com
// w: http://www.imagecraft.com/pub/Portfolio09/ blog:
http://rfman.wordpress.com
// book: http://www.blurb.com/bookstore/detail/745963


In reply to: Message from bs.pearce at cox.net (Sue Pearce) ([Leica] LUG Digest, Vol 43, Issue 194)
Message from mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner) ([Leica] LUG Digest, Vol 43, Issue 194)