U of S | Mailing List Archive | alt-photo-process-l | Re: gum "curves"

Re: gum "curves"

  • To: alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca
  • Subject: Re: gum "curves"
  • From: Carmen Lizardo <carmenlizardo@yahoo.com>
  • Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2006 13:08:26 -0800 (PST)
  • Comments: "alt-photo-process mailing list"
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com;h=Message-ID:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding;b=MsAcZzIaaYWmMrXCWs3dIxfejdVoD+P/r68+DHKzUrkLsfU7qX8RwDiyzzJaGumazlyrdSD+lSGZKI5Aecs3SMGrW3jNuSezYmI2vhbxEOM5e9Qo8WdZTKakEPLZvrJ7jZMeDM1rKSq7pWpprlUCbIhIokAcN4ziRtn8/fJe47o= ;
  • In-reply-to: <65508.>
  • List-id: alt-photo-process mailing list <alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca>
  • Reply-to: alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca

Dear List,
The first time I took an alternative photography
course, which at my school (Pratt Institute) was
called Non-silver Photography (although we did used
silver nitrate for some of the stuff we learned) we
made enlarged negatives the no-so-good old-fashioned
way, by using lith film. We learned to make negatives
to suit each process by controlling exposure,
development time and developer concentration. My
negatives for gum were VERY different than my
negatives for say, platinum. The process of making
enlarged negatives though me a whole lot about each
photo process and its 
"analog curve". When I started to make digital negs, 
way before I read anything about anyone making
digi-negs (I am not implying that I made digi-negs
before, say Dan Burkholder, by no means, it just that
I spent A LOT of time in the darkroom and did not read
very much outside information) I knew to change each
negative with curves or levels, just to get more o
less ink (density) on my negative print to suit
whatever process I was printing for. I did  - and
still do this- very naively, no densitometer, just my

Anyways, for me curves is a really a natural thing to
do, just as when I had to print my lith negatives to
suit the different process I was learning. So whether
you do it ala PDN, which I consider to be very
predictable, or by eye, I believe that you need some
sort of control system to have usable negatives.
(unless you are really lucky and just happen to have a
printer that prints with the necessary densities to
suit your process)

I use PDN for my Kallitypes, and Dan Burkholder's
method for my Gums so go figure!! (Must days I live in
the wild side and just use my eye balls to judge a


--- Camden Hardy <camden@hardyphotography.net> wrote:

> Well, Katherine, I wish you had just told me I was
> blacklisted so I
> wouldn't have wasted my time responding
> (productively, let the record
> show) to your comments in this gum curve discussion.
> One last thing and I'm done with this topic, since
> it seems futile for me
> to continue.
> > Well, I won't name the names of the people who
> have said this, but I
> > think you might be surprised to find who you're
> saying this about.
> > You can find them in the archives, if you care to
> look, and I'll
> > leave your comment to stand on its own.
> It doesn't really matter who said what; I really
> don't even want to know. 
> My point still stands that when used correctly, PDN
> is 100% predictable.
> Like Sandy said: if you control the process, a
> correctly curved negative
> doesn't fail...usually.  :)
> Camden Hardy
> camden[at]hardyphotography[dot]net
> http://www.hardyphotography.net

Low, Low, Low Rates! Check out Yahoo! Messenger's cheap PC-to-Phone call rates