Curious about ziatypes

[Mainecoonmaniac]

Has any APUGer did ziatype printing before? I was inspired by Kerik Kouklis's prints I saw in Yosemite last December. I don't know if they were ziatypes, but I'm hoping I could make some prints that have the same look. I don't think I can achieve the level of craftsmanship as Mr. Kouklis, but are ziatypes easy to do? I've made cyanotypes before. I don't want to use a brush with ziatypes like I do with cyanotypes because the emulsion is so expensive and don't want to waste any of the Ziatype emulsion. I plan to make a puddle pusher from the instructions published on The Light Farm. Is that the way to go? I want to start by getting a kit from Bostick and Sullivan so I don't have to do any mixing and go broke buying the palladium chloride. Any input is valued. I got bitten by the palladium print bug.

 

[Rick A]

Have you tried looking the process up, I've been interrested in doing some. I found some info here: http://www.alternativephotography.com/wp/ or http://www.alternativephotography.com/wp/processes/platinum/the-ziatype-process
I wouldn't mind seeing it done in person, maybe someone can do an on line seminar.

 

[Loris Medici]

POP Pd printing (Ware-Malde or Ziatype) processes are easy. If you can do *good* cyanotypes, then you're good to go for pt/pd. (In fact, it's harder to make a *good* cyanotype!) BTW, you can use Richeson or DaVinci (5080 series) brushes w/o wasting extra sensitizer. (With my DaVinci, I use the same amnt. of coating solution as I need with a glass coating rod.) Edit: Just wet the brush with distilled water and squeeze the excess right before coating, it won't soak up and waste the sensitizer...

 

[Klainmeister]

Just order by the phone and have Dana or one of the other B+S folks to explain things clearly and help you out. They will take time to make sure you are doing it right.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

Ditto what everyone else has been saying about Ziatypes. They're easy-peasy. And I'll put in yet another vote for the Richeson 9010 "magic brush". Just soak it in distilled water between coatings, and squeeze off excess water just prior to coating. Minimal difference in coating volume required vs. rod coating, and you have far more control over emulsion distribution. Especially if your coating surface is not dead flat and level (but you should coat on top of a sheet of glass or plexi anyway, to smooth things out). Another thing to think about is - QUIT WORRYING ABOUT WASTE. Until your coating technique is flawless, you'll want to have enough excess coating to gauge the exposure by examining your borders. If you pour so little emulsion that you only have enough to cover the negative's surface area, you'll not have enough to judge exposure by, and run the risk of not having enough to actually evenly coat the entire image area. A little waste at the edges is far cheaper than throwing out a print because the exposure was uneven due to thin coating.

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

That's what I like about APUGers, they're always are encourage and very helpful. I will look for the Richeson 9010 "magic brush" and put my order in at Bostick and Sullivan. I'm also gonna build my own 20" x20" UV light source. OK TheFlyingCamera, I'll stop worrying about waste even though I'm cheap

 

[jimcollum]

i've been doing ziatypes for the last 10 years.. a great process, and a pretty easy one. Humidity is the big factor with it. my coating room is small, so it's easier to keep the humidity at a constant during coating (about 70% for my work). As far as brushes go.. even better than the Richeson are the brushes made by Tsuyoshi (Project Basho). He takes the Richeson bristles and puts them in a traditional wood Japanese handle. One of the only problems with the Richeson is the eventual corrosion of the metal ferrule. Tsuyoshi's modification gets rid of this. If you're ever in the Santa Cruz, Ca area. please let me know. .i'd be happy to give a demo

 

[payral]

He takes the Richeson bristles and puts them in a traditional wood Japanese handle. One of the only problems with the Richeson is the eventual corrosion of the metal ferrule.

It's very easy to improve Richeson brush to avoid corrosion.
Here you can see how to modify in diffrent ways:
http://payral.pagesperso-orange.fr/Richeson/index.html

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

Hi Philippe,

Thanks for the tip. I looked at those brushes and a 4" brush is over $100 US! I will as Americans say "bite the bullet' and buy one.

Thanks,
Don

 

[deisenlord]

Maybe Kerik will chime in but FWIW the prints you saw at Yosemite were gum bichromate over palladium and straight DOP palladium, not Ziatype. Also Kerik teaches a printing workshop at the Ansel Adams gallery.

 

[artonpaper]

I too have been doing Ziatypes for about 10 years. If you are doing palladium printing, which is what Ziatypes primarily are, you have to be prepared to spend some money. If you keep thinking about how much everything is, you will be inhibited. Start with small prints. My Richeson brush is about 1 1/2 inch wide and cost less than $50. Puddle pushers only work with certain papers. I have used them with COT, (and the late great Cranes) but I mainly use the brush. I feel I'm getting a deeper coating. It's funny, but I have printed in all sorts of humidity conditions from 40% to 70% with no problems. First I coat the paper and let it rest for 2 minutes. Then, in 40% I move quickly, just drying the paper with a fan for about 1 -2 minutes until it feels dry enough to place a negative on it. (I don't use Mylar under the negative.) In more humid conditions I use a hair dryer with the heat turned off or low for about 1 minute. I have found that too much humidity can cause graininess in the print. My gallery has many examples of Ziatypes. I found the kits that Bostick and Sullivan sell, to be a good starting point. I made my first Ziatype in the sun, just for the fun of it, and it was a keeper, and I sold it.

 

[nick mulder]

yep, done some ziatypes...

Found they had a different tonality to a Pd/Pt print - a little bit colder, but more drier if that makes any sense

They are easier in some regards, but I've gone back to NA2 - just me though I'm sure there are people out there that ziatypes will be perfect for

 

[snallan]

I have been doing Ziatypes for a few years, and like the others here, have found the process pretty straight forward. One tweak I rather like is the colour range you can get replacing some of the palladium with gold.

At one time I was keen to try the new Chrysotype process developed by Mike Ware, so had some gold solution to hand. But, as I was printing using the Ziatype process at the time I had a go adding gold to the sensitiser solution in place of some of the palladium. With less gold than palladium the prints take on a cool blue colour like the print of the feather.

Whereas adding more gold than palladium starts to produce a deeper blue with reddish tones like the print of the Buddha, much like have been described with chrysotypes. The print of the feather had around 3 drops of 5% gold solution and 4 drops of the palladium solution, the Buddha had 5 drops of gold solution to 3 of the palladium.