To choose a method ...

For quality contact printing, how would you evaluate the results of doing lith v Palladium v Lodima?
I can see the advantage of palladium with its surface characteristic. Do lith and Lodima share this feature?
Also, which is least toxic/dangerous?
Which is most expensive?
Which gives the most consistent, predictable results?

Lodima and Lith are both silver-gelatin processes. Lith is usually a projection process. Each has its own "look". Which is preferable will depends on the subject matter and what you want to achieve. Lodima will give prints that look like regular darkroom prints. Lith is highly variable, giving a wide variety of image colors and microcontrasts depending on the materials and technique. Palladium is somewhat variable, depending on paper, coating technique, negative production, coating formula, toning, and somewhat on processing. Generally it is warm brown and is characteristically embedded in the support paper. All of these processes can be considered permanent with proper processing. Technically, a well processed palladium print on quality paper is probably the most stable, but on a practical basis there is not much difference.

CollinB said:

For quality contact printing, how would you evaluate the results of doing lith v Palladium v Lodima?
I can see the advantage of palladium with its surface characteristic. Do lith and Lodima share this feature?
Also, which is least toxic/dangerous?
Which is most expensive?
Which gives the most consistent, predictable results?

Click to expand...

I'd suggest viewing some prints (in person) and decide for yourself. This is an area of strong opinion!

One of those is easy enough- for Pt/Pd, Bergger COT320 is what most people use. I also like kozo mulberry paper a lot, but it's too textured and thin for some people's taste.