Well that's something that took quite literally hours. I printed out on Thursday night on expired Bromide paper. I didn't get a chance to do any more until Sat, so yesterday I bleached the prints and refixed them. So far so good - they did what they were supposed to. I must have spent 3 hours last night soaking and inking...... I decided I'd save money on this by buying a cheap stencil brush.. BIG mistake - I knew this wasn't going to work after the first attempt as the brush marks were quite obvious and in the lighter patch it's very evident. I ended up watching a couple of tutorials on you-tube as I was getting so fed up . So off to get a decent brush to try again. Thanks for any comments recently, I will be trying to catch up as much as possible.
@ingrid2101 From what I remember of previous discussions (couldn't find a link) this site compress the images quite heavily on upload to save server costs, while Flickr doesn't. Hence, when the finer structural details of a photo is of importance (as is often the case for our photos) it's bound to look better on Flickr. In addition to that, this site strips colour space information so anything other than sRGB will look less vibrant than it does before upload.
I think it looks great enlarged. It appears to be an engrossing process. I am interested in looking more into it. Thanks for the link. The textures are intense, and really add to the subject. I have to say, your project is one of my favorites. It really inspires me to continue to go out and shoot similar subject matter. Which as you know, finding the time and the will can be work all by itself. So, thank you.
