Re: the look of tricolor vs CMYK
Gum Print is fine with me hehehehe In a message dated 1/31/07 7:48:48 AM, Keith@GumPhoto.com writes: Mark, I call them gum prints. I'm pretty much an Occam's Razor sort of person. Regardless of how the negatives are produced or what goes on the paper, they are gum prints. If the end result looks like a "true" color photograph or a charcoal drawing, well, it's all there in the final work and one really doesn't;t have to go to extremes to explain it to the viewer. Judy makes a couple of good points in her reply, the most important being that rules are tiresome in alt (although in my reply to her, "rules" or maybe more accurately "media descriptions" are sometimes demanded in the marketplace.) In any event, people reading this thread will interpret differently.. Some may interpret "tri-color" as being made from RGB-separated negatives. My negatives come from a combination of CMYK and RGB and might include something as specialized as a negative that is produced from the 80% difference between the blue channel and the inverse of the magenta channel as defined in the Calculations function of Photoshop or a "spot" channel that included only the turquoise in the original non-separated image. So I might start out with 7 negatives, but the end result might use three or four or all seven negatives to apply the same gray pigment. So what do you call that? I call it a "gum print". And I call it that even if it happens to also use a cyano or vandyke layer in the mix. Keith Best Wishes, Mark Nelson Precision Digital Negatives - The System PDNPrint Forum at Yahoo Groups www.MarkINelsonPhoto.com
|