(End credits, Excel Saga) Yes, today I have a very sad tale to share in my cyanography experiments. You remember last time, I shared this: Well, I have experimented further with inkjet photo paper, and made some very unpleasant discoveries along the way. The first is the streaking - without using a non-contact application method, I am not going to avoid it. The gel surface is just too fragile. So if I want to persist with this, it will be out with the air-brush. I somehow doubt I am going to find spray-cans of cyanotype sensitiser, after all. The second is in washing. Because there is no cellulose for the Prussian Blue to bond with, the washing inevitably destroys the image, meaning that you cannot preserve the image long-term. This also means that you end up including the un-exposed chemicals in the scan, which adds considerable grain and loss of contrast - especially in the high-tones of the inverted image. This second issue is essentially insoluble, which is a pity, as it would h
WOW! An interesting experiment. Let's hope it produces.
ReplyDeleteIt should. It has been in limited trials for 3 or more years now. Interestingly that article has a different explanation for the mechanism to any I have seen previously (all previous explanations that I saw talked about providing an alternate target for the IgE antibodies).
ReplyDeleteThat 1 in 70 figure looks weird, it comes from the Coeliac Australia website and seems to come from a statement that 30% of the population caries one of the two gene's associated with Coeliac disease and 1 in 30 of them will get the disease. This they calculate to be 330,000 (math looks ok) but then they go on to say 80% currently remain undiagnosed. This smells of someone trying to fudge over a humongous difference between the calculated rate and the reported rate.
Anyone have additional info about this?
I don't know whether to say EWWWW or Cool!
ReplyDelete