Re: greens in gum

To: alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca
Subject: Re: greens in gum
From: Katharine Thayer <kthayer@pacifier.com>
Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2006 16:13:42 -0700
Comments: "alt-photo-process mailing list"
In-reply-to: <792EAC4D-6D96-4B4F-A845-E924140B1A40@pacifier.com>
List-id: alt-photo-process mailing list <alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca>
References: <005d01c6e4c3$e800a5b0$0200a8c0@DC5YX7B1><792EAC4D-6D96-4B4F-A845-E924140B1A40@pacifier.com>
Reply-to: alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca

On Sep 30, 2006, at 1:08 PM, Katharine Thayer wrote:

Like it or not, science and tests can be useful, as when they tell us that PY3 is marginally lightfast at best, and that Daniel Smith isn't one of the best brands for lightfastness.

Sorry, this could be misunderstood as written. Daniel Smith as a rule is a very good brand on all counts, including lightfastness. It's just that for this particular pigment, it's even less lightfast than some of the other brands, at least according to handprint's tests.
kt

References:
- greens in gum
  - From: "Christina Z. Anderson" <zphoto@montana.net>
- Re: greens in gum
  - From: Katharine Thayer <kthayer@pacifier.com>