Re: Attn. Chris + All. Gum, Gelatine + Direct Carbon.
The subject of Fresson is fascinating, in part because of its origin
and its role in pictorial photograhy.
However, one of the areas I know that Art and I disagree on is the
issue of commercial viability of a direct carbon paper similar to
Frresson. I simply don't believe there is a market out there for the
product. To say nothing of the engineering that would be needed to
manufacture the paper. If there were a market Dick Sullvian of B&S
would already be producing the paper, IMO, since he has the machinery
and facilities and a good understanding of the issues. I am not
saying he knows how to make paper that is exactly like Fresson but I
am fairly certain that it would not be to much of a stretch to make a
paper that works a lot like it. Or even Nadeau, who one would presume
knows at least as much about Fresson as anyone here and has a coating
machine.
I could be wrong, and nothing would make me happier than to see you
or Dave or Art make so much money from your labors that you will set
up your grandchildren for life, but this boy just don't see that
happening, and my suggestion would be to just share what you have
learned with the rest of us.
I hate to rain on the parade but I just don't believe there is any
commercial market for this product in today's world.
Sandy King
At 7:12 PM +0100 5/26/07, John Grocott wrote:
Chris,
I am sure Art's patented process would be very helpful to
anyone looking for a good working procedure. Art also kindly sent
me, years back, a copy of his patent. Maybe, one day, my own
formula, which does not contain gum, will be common knowledge. But
I am afraid I am unable to share the results gained from so many
hours of frustrating work without the financial ability to
commercialize it if it was viewed to be viable.
I wonder how Dave Soemarko feels about this issue? I guess
I feel much the same as the Fressons. All the same, it would be
great if some enterprising person were to start making the Direct
Carbon paper, again. Then, all the new generations of young photo
artists would have an extra medium with which to work. Maybe that's
too sentimental in this day and age.
One of the problems of commercially making and
marketing a DC paper would be the lack of any guarantee as to
successful results. Maybe one reason the Fressons discontinued that
side of their business.
Dick Sullivan mentioned, very briefly, in a
recent List posting, the ''ARVEL'' process. This paper was made and
marketed by the Fressons for a period of approx. fifteen years prior
to WW 2. ( Luis Nadeau). This process did not require great
attention to temperature control and development was exlusively by
weak Sodium Hypochlorite solution and cold water spray. Rather
more like gum working. No messy sawdust needed. Here again, we have
no published clues re. the emulsion formulae. Just imagine how
popular this Arvel process must have been with amateur photographers
when the war stopped everything short.
We have a lot of catching up to do. Nice w/e.
Later. John - Photographist - London - UK
----- Original Message ----- From: "Christina Z. Anderson"
<zphoto@montana.net>
To: <alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca>
Sent: Saturday, May 26, 2007 4:16 PM
Subject: Re: Attn. Chris + All. Gum, Gelatine + Direct Carbon.
John,
Now, as far as gelatin and gum, Art was so kind a few years back as
to give me a copy of his patent. I run across articles on Fresson
every now and again when researching gum, but of course, the
articles are all sort of like "Well, the Fresson paper MAY contain
this..."
The reason I am intrigued with the gelatin is that Echague said it
provided a much more stable layer to use sawdust development with.
But if I remember (Art can chime in here?) gum and gelatin do not
mix well. But my gum printing formula is essentially a 1:1 mix
(tho I use stock pigment mixes and use ammonium dichromate cut in
half to a 15% dilution) so I don't have a clue how much gelatine or
how I would do it.''
|