Re: the look of tricolor vs CMYK
Thanks Sandy—that was great! And funny... I personally like a lot of the characteristics of gum it has a very nice aesthetic. Just think of the flap that digital has caused—if it had appeared in the 19th century, a bunch of us would have ended up being burned at the stake....or like a steak... (the above paragraph is ready for Judy Seigel to proofread) Best Wishes, Mark Nelson Precision Digital Negatives - The System PDNPrint Forum at Yahoo Groups www.MarkINelsonPhoto.com In a message dated 1/31/07 12:31:04 PM, sanking@clemson.edu writes: A few notes from the past (early 20th century) on the work of the "gummers". "In the prints exhibited by this gum-water-colorists there is not to be found, even coincidentally, a single pure white, and as to his 'three-color bichromated water-color prints,' I sincerely believe he has taken up the wrong profession." "During the second half of April the public has seen many exhibitions of prints made with the gum-bichromate process. These photographs include all manner of subject motifs: architecture, landscapes, sea-scapes, figures studies, and portraits. It seems that in photography the modern current is to avoid detail in the print as much as possible and to make the observer forget that he is looking at a photography." "It seems that photography has passed its true borders, and entered a new field of reproduction, gum-bichromate being the causes of this phenomenon. Such work makes the production of the negative a useless and superfluous step." "The day is fast approaching when the making of a gum bichromate print will be as socially unacceptable as belching or the release in public of of other bodily reliefs." Perhaps these comments from the past will put some perspective on the current hair-splitting as to the nature of true gum prints. Sandy King
|