Drying FB Paper

"Frank Pittel" wrote in
message ...
Gregory Blank wrote:
: In article ,
: Tom Phillips wrote:

: You're likely using a screen that is not chemically
inert
: (as far as drying anyway.)

: How do you figure that?

: Drying screens should not leave
: impressions in the emulsion.

: No they shouldn't but it may have been a different
: screen set than the current nylon? screen I use now
: and what I am doing works so I ain't gonna fix it by
: putting the prints face down :-)

I dry my fiber prints face down on screens from Calumet
(zone VI)
and when I remove the dry prints prints they have the
screen pattern
on them. It looks like the screen made indentations in the
soft wet
emulsion. I am of course carefull not to drag the wet
print on the
screens. I've also noticed that the with time the marks
fade. I've
always attributed it to the emulsion relaxing with time.

I'm sure that I'm all wet with what the screen pattern is
and why it
fades with time. All I know for sure is that the screen
pattern is there
when the prints first dry and after a while the screen
patterns fade.

My biggest problem is when I get lint, dust, etc on the
screens and I
don't notice until the prints are dry and the junk from
the screen is
embedded in the emulsion of the print. I've ruined more
prints then I
care to think about that way.
--




Keep working millions on welfare depend on you
-------------------


I think what you are seeing is residual moisture where
the screens were in contact with the print. The emulsion
will be slightly swollen there. If this is the case it will
shrink up again as the moisture reaches equibrium. The
effect probably varies among papers due to the variations in
the "hardness" of the emulsion, and will probably also vary
depending on whether a hardening fixing bath is used or not
since the hardening affects the amount by which the gelatin
swells.
Actually, this is its primary purpose.

--
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA

Gregory Blank wrote:

In article ,
Tom Phillips wrote:

You're likely using a screen that is not chemically inert
(as far as drying anyway.)

How do you figure that?

Not all screen materials are equal (yes?) and some might
not be chemically inert; from experience I know some
plastics at least are incompatible. I once used a
plastic material screen to dry some RC prints and it
reacted chemically, leaving a permanent pattern of the
screen on the prints.

Drying screens should not leave
impressions in the emulsion.

No they shouldn't but it may have been a different
screen set than the current nylon? screen I use now
and what I am doing works so I ain't gonna fix it by
putting the prints face down :-)

If it ain't broke don't fix is a fairly good maxim.

LF Website @ http://members.verizon.net/~gregoryblank

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong,
is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918h

Frank Pittel wrote:

Gregory Blank wrote:
: In article ,
: Tom Phillips wrote:

: You're likely using a screen that is not chemically inert
: (as far as drying anyway.)

: How do you figure that?

: Drying screens should not leave
: impressions in the emulsion.

: No they shouldn't but it may have been a different
: screen set than the current nylon? screen I use now
: and what I am doing works so I ain't gonna fix it by
: putting the prints face down :-)

I dry my fiber prints face down on screens from Calumet (zone VI)
and when I remove the dry prints prints they have the screen pattern
on them. It looks like the screen made indentations in the soft wet
emulsion. I am of course carefull not to drag the wet print on the
screens. I've also noticed that the with time the marks fade. I've
always attributed it to the emulsion relaxing with time.

I'm sure that I'm all wet with what the screen pattern is and why it
fades with time. All I know for sure is that the screen pattern is there
when the prints first dry and after a while the screen patterns fade.

If the patterns disappear one might surmise the wet emulsion
is being physically impressed when soft. But in 30 years I've
never used screens that did this. The screens I made (from
fiberglass I think, could be nylon) have a very thin, fine,
and soft porous pattern and do not leave marks wet or dry.

My biggest problem is when I get lint, dust, etc on the screens and I
don't notice until the prints are dry and the junk from the screen is
embedded in the emulsion of the print. I've ruined more prints then I
care to think about that way.

My screens are layered in an enclosed rack with a covered
top. Dust isn't much of a problem. I helps to wash the
screens often, both to remove dust and any possible chemical
contamination (from work prints, etc.)

jjs wrote:

"David Nebenzahl" wrote in message
...

Well, of course; what I was getting at was the possibility that residual
chemistry can be absorbed by a blotter and accumulate over time, so that
eventually you have a *lot* of junk which can transfer back to prints,
even if the prints have been reasonably well washed.

Air dry them on vinyl screen. Press them flat between archival paper layers
in a book press. I have to believe you can find a book press.

Vinyl is not chemically inert, i.e., not an archival material.

Richard Knoppow wrote:

"Frank Pittel" wrote in
message ...
Gregory Blank wrote:
: In article ,
: Tom Phillips wrote:

: You're likely using a screen that is not chemically
inert
: (as far as drying anyway.)

: How do you figure that?

: Drying screens should not leave
: impressions in the emulsion.

: No they shouldn't but it may have been a different
: screen set than the current nylon? screen I use now
: and what I am doing works so I ain't gonna fix it by
: putting the prints face down :-)

I dry my fiber prints face down on screens from Calumet
(zone VI)
and when I remove the dry prints prints they have the
screen pattern
on them. It looks like the screen made indentations in the
soft wet
emulsion. I am of course carefull not to drag the wet
print on the
screens. I've also noticed that the with time the marks
fade. I've
always attributed it to the emulsion relaxing with time.

I'm sure that I'm all wet with what the screen pattern is
and why it
fades with time. All I know for sure is that the screen
pattern is there
when the prints first dry and after a while the screen
patterns fade.

My biggest problem is when I get lint, dust, etc on the
screens and I
don't notice until the prints are dry and the junk from
the screen is
embedded in the emulsion of the print. I've ruined more
prints then I
care to think about that way.
--




Keep working millions on welfare depend on you
-------------------


I think what you are seeing is residual moisture where
the screens were in contact with the print. The emulsion
will be slightly swollen there. If this is the case it will
shrink up again as the moisture reaches equibrium. The
effect probably varies among papers due to the variations in
the "hardness" of the emulsion, and will probably also vary
depending on whether a hardening fixing bath is used or not
since the hardening affects the amount by which the gelatin
swells.
Actually, this is its primary purpose.


Sounds logical. However, it may also possibly depend on the
fineness of the screen's pores, since this is not a phenomenon
I ever noticed with my screens.

On 2/24/2005 12:29 AM Tom Phillips spake thus:

jjs wrote:

"David Nebenzahl" wrote in message
...

Well, of course; what I was getting at was the possibility that residual
chemistry can be absorbed by a blotter and accumulate over time, so that
eventually you have a *lot* of junk which can transfer back to prints,
even if the prints have been reasonably well washed.

Air dry them on vinyl screen. Press them flat between archival paper layers
in a book press. I have to believe you can find a book press.

Vinyl is not chemically inert, i.e., not an archival material.

Fiberglass, then? Certainly not aluminum ...


--
"I know I will go to hell, because I pardoned Richard Nixon."

- Former President Gerald Ford to his golf partners, as related by
the late Hunter S. Thompson

David Nebenzahl wrote:

On 2/24/2005 12:29 AM Tom Phillips spake thus:

jjs wrote:

"David Nebenzahl" wrote in message
...

Well, of course; what I was getting at was the possibility that residual
chemistry can be absorbed by a blotter and accumulate over time, so that
eventually you have a *lot* of junk which can transfer back to prints,
even if the prints have been reasonably well washed.

Air dry them on vinyl screen. Press them flat between archival paper layers
in a book press. I have to believe you can find a book press.

Vinyl is not chemically inert, i.e., not an archival material.

Fiberglass, then? Certainly not aluminum ...

I believe mine are fiberglass.

Don't know of anyone who's ever used aluminum; I'd
think it would corrode/rust eventually.

On Thu, 24 Feb 2005 01:19:31 GMT, Gregory Blank
wrote:

In article . com,
wrote:

After all else has been done prior to drying, the blotter may coax some
minute additional chemistry from the print.

Yes and over time those minute amounts contaminate the prints
unless one chucks the blotter.


feb2405 from Lloyd Erlick,

Chuck them now, before you use them, and they will
never, ever contaminate your prints. In fact, chuck
them before you buy them, and they will be even better.

Chuck your tongs, gloves and print drying screens, too.
Don't chuck the squeegee, though, it's still good for
cleaning the sink.

regards,
--le
________________________________
Lloyd Erlick Portraits, Toronto.
voice: 416-686-0326
email:
net: www.heylloyd.com
________________________________
--

In article ,
Lloyd Erlick Lloyd at @the-wire. dot com wrote:

feb2405 from Lloyd Erlick,

Chuck them now, before you use them, and they will
never, ever contaminate your prints. In fact, chuck
them before you buy them, and they will be even better.

Chuck your tongs, gloves and print drying screens, too.
Don't chuck the squeegee, though, it's still good for
cleaning the sink.

regards,
--le

I never use a blotter, so there's no blot on my record
or my prints :-)

& Yes that's what my squeegee gets used for,...not prints.

--
LF Website @ http://members.verizon.net/~gregoryblank

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong,
is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918

On Thu, 24 Feb 2005 15:18:54 -0500, Lloyd Erlick Lloyd at @the-wire.
dot com wrote:

[---]

Chuck them now, before you use them, and they will
never, ever contaminate your prints. In fact, chuck
them before you buy them, and they will be even better.

Chuck your tongs, gloves and print drying screens, too.
Don't chuck the squeegee, though, it's still good for
cleaning the sink.

I know I've said this before, but I cannot but recommend the technical
article on your website on that subject. The phrase:

Drying Screens Get Out of Town If You Know What's Good for You, and
Take Squeegee With You, Too!

still makes me crack up, every time I read it !