<< The problem is not that it is a direct carbon process. The problem is that
the development is not automatic. With almost all other photographic
processes, a certain amount of light energy gives a specific amount of
image density. With Fresson the image density is determined by the length
of the "development" or wash-off when you decide to stop pouring the
abrasive mixture of sawdust and water. This can be anywhere from 2 minutes
to perhaps 30 minutes.
So I take it that this step cannot be automated. I mean, can it be done in
such a way that it always take, say, 3 minutes of sawdust wash? Or is it that
the effect or sawdust washing is rather hard to control that a simple control
of time does not work?
>> George's 4-color carbon process (I have seen many of his prints) is a
simplification of the old double transfer tricolor process. He makes his
own color seps off a scanner (he's been doing this professionally for
years) and he makes his carbon tissues from scratch using liquid
dispersions, thus avoiding the mess from grinding, etc. He may want to
elaborate on the technique here but considering his 200+ pages of notes,
let's say it's not for those of you who find cyanotype "challenging";-)
Does he make this manual available?
>> I find his results are much superior to the 4-color Fressons, although one
has to be careful with the word "superior" here.
I take it that by superior you mean more controllable here. Is this the
reason why you are not doing 4-color Fresson? that after some much trouble
(in setup, coating, etc. etc.) the result is not that controllable.
>> Here UltraStable has an advantage as you can, with some extra work, use a
variety of real papers. If you want on paper what's on your chrome, these
are the processes to use.
I would like to hear your comment on UltraStable from a technical point of
view. From what I have read (from magazine articles or their literature), I
have never considered UltraStable another (or a new) process. Isn't it
basically a commercially available pigment tissue? Sure, the color separation
is normally done digitally, but that I consider the process / technology on
the color separation side, not on the photographic process. I mean, I can do
separation and/or digital negative w/ gum, carbon, carbro, cyanotype (no
separation), but I wouldn't call those new processes. Would you?