U of S | Mailing List Archive | alt-photo-process-l | Re: Fresson question

Re: Fresson question

At 12:26 AM -0500 1/11/08, Judy Seigel wrote:

Sandy King, world-class expert on carbon printing, with publications & triumphs worldwide, plus advising (I gather) Bostick & Sullivan on their recent commercial carbon paper, yet -- IIRC, Sandy has rarely so much as uttered the word "Fresson."

Perhaps he, and others, achieve what Fresson can't, but the world still seems to long for a paper to buy and print on.



Let me remark that the subject of Fresson is very interesting to me from a historical perspective, but the kind of image that one gets from the process (and from other similar direct carbon processes) is not what I want in my own work. As a general rule one gets with the Fresson process an image that is rather low in reflective Dmax, has a fairly limited range of tones, and has a painterly/impressionistic kind of look. I prefer the direct carbon transfer process because it gives much greater reflective Dmax, has a range of tones comparable to a pt./pd. print, and the print has a very "photographic" type of look that maximizes the appearance of detail and sharpness.

I do not claim that any look is inherently superior to another, but I do know for a fact what I like for my own personal work.

My impression is that the demand for a Fresson type paper is rather low and probably does not merit the investment of much time or capital. Dick Sullivan at B&S could easily make such a paper if he wanted, and since he apparently has nothing against making money I believe that he would if he felt that it would be worthwhile financially. Instead he has decided to make and market carbon transfer tissue, which is capable of giving a much better print from a technical perspective.

Sandy King