U of S | Mailing List Archive | alt-photo-process-l | RE: Gum Humidity Question

RE: Gum Humidity Question

  • To: alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca
  • Subject: RE: Gum Humidity Question
  • From: Judy Seigel <jseigel@panix.com>
  • Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2006 23:32:48 -0400 (EDT)
  • Comments: "alt-photo-process mailing list"
  • In-reply-to: <DIEJIODOMMCOAHNJNAFCCEHKCLAA.Keith@GumPhoto.com>
  • List-id: alt-photo-process mailing list <alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca>
  • References: <DIEJIODOMMCOAHNJNAFCCEHKCLAA.Keith@GumPhoto.com>
  • Reply-to: alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca

On Thu, 28 Sep 2006, Keith Gerling wrote:
"4. You don't get emulsion clinging to negative when exposing "quite damp"?"

It sometimes happens.  I use lith negs.  When the negative clings to the
print (keep in mind: it hasn't dried because it has only been under glass
for 4-6 minutes) I usually rinse it in water. A hassle, but it prevents the
dichromate from bleaching the negative.
I suspect, Keith, that this is a very delicate balance.... because my experience (mercifully rare because I don't do your high-humidity act) is that gum emulsion sticking to the negative is exposed, hardened & fairly permanent... tho I probably expose longer than you do, as I like a fairly long development....

"PS.  I did some tests years ago with additions of ammonia to the gum
emulsion, then exposing after a day or even two days.  Some of the effects
were in fact interesting, but ultimately I decided more trouble than worth
for whatever they were."

Can you describe the nature of these effects?  How much ammonia did you add?
I haven't forgotten this question & the moment may be soon... as I have cleaned the studio down to bottom layer... the notebook that's supposed to have those notes is.... ta da ! VISIBLE !