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

Re: archivalness of gum

On Dec 20, 2007, at 12:17 PM, Katharine Thayer wrote:
At any rate, if archivality is determined by the pigment rather than the colloid, then I don't understand Gawain's statement about carbon being more archival than gum (assuming both using same pigment of course). Or is there something about crosslinked gelatin that's more archival than crosslinked gum? If you have any research about that, Gawain, I'd sure like to know about it, thanks.
Re-reading Gawain's post, I see that he didn't really make a very strong statement about carbon being more archival than gum as I was remembering from my first quick scan. I apologize for the misconstruction.

On Dec 20, 2007, at 11:11 AM, Gawain Weaver wrote:
Leaving the definition of archival aside, my vote is for carbon, though certainly gum is no slouch. And neither is sulfur toned gelatin silver (in fact, I might change my vote to sulfur toned gelatin silver). Platinum is great too. Though carbon does have that cracking in the dmax problem in some examples of it, and platinum has the occasional staining/yellowing problem. I’m afraid I haven’t seen enough 100+ year old gum to really comment. The only problems I’ve seen on gum we’re environment issues—mold, fly specks, etc. As usual with these things- it depends.