Re: slightly OT - dry prints

[Katharine Thayer <kthayer@pacifier.com>]

Interesting, Henk.   I'm not sure how the distinction between  
"emulsion transfer" and "image transfer" applies to inkjet prints.    
There couldn't be an "emulsion transfer" with inkjet, because there's  
no emulsion, right? ...  all there is to transfer is ink, whichever  
way you transfer it.  Or am I misunderstanding the distinction you're  
making?

kt


On Jun 3, 2007, at 7:17 AM, henk thijs wrote:

> > > > and what you mean by transfers from inkjet?
> > > using prepared polyester sheets (digital negs) as a carrier for  
> > > the inkjet print, one can transfer the inkjet print to an aquarel  
> > > paper.
> > In a review in the Oregonian this weekend,  there was a  
> > description of photographs that were inkjet prints that were then  
> > transferred to canvas using acrylic medium  to lift and transfer  
> > the image,  with a result that "resembles an encaustic painting."
> Using acrylic medium results in an emulsion transfer, like the well- 
> known polaroid transfer (transferring the 'skin' of an well  
> developed polaroid to a carrier).
> If you want an image transfer (like the one in polaroid transfers:  
> before developing is complete, transfer the wet 'RGB-layers' to a  
> damp carrier) you have to prepare the inkjet sheet with Golden  
> Acrylic Flow release and then transfer to a carrier.
> Cheers,
> Henk
>
>
> >  I haven't seen the work in question, so can't evaluate the claim,  
> > but there's another possibility for a creative person to exploit.
> Hopefully in the next half a year,
> Henk
> ------------------------------------
> www.thijs-foto.com
> ------------------------------------