Re: Was Re: question on sizing, now fish eyes
On fisheyes - I get them from time to time and have always put them down to some inconsistency in the sizing (brush-coated 3% gelatine with formaldehyde hardener). They always brush out once the gum-pigment layer begins to get a bit more viscous, and as far as I can see have no effect on the final image. Henry On 10/9/08 18:28, "Katharine Thayer" <kthayer@pacifier.com> wrote: > Laura, I can't find the other thread you referred to so maybe it was > under a title that wouldn't identify it as being about a coating > problem with Payne's grey. However, since "Payne's grey" isn't a > pigment in and of itself, but is simply a convenience mixture of some > blue (different manufacturers use different blues) and lamp black, > it's unlikely that it would behave in some way that would be linkable > to the color name "Payne's grey." > > When I got your post, I thought "good timing," because I've been > planning to get back to my troubleshooting page, which I've been > promising for a couple of years. So I went downstairs even before I'd > had my shower, to make fisheyes to show you. But as I said, I > seldom encounter fisheyes, so it wasn't such a simple job to make > them happen. The "fisheyes" I occasionally get (on Arches bright > white sized with gelatin-glyoxal) are very small, almost like > pinpricks, so maybe they really don't qualify as fisheyes, except > that they appear in the same way as larger fisheyes, as a visible > lateral retraction of the emulsion from areas of the paper. Anyway, > this morning I couldn't make that happen on Arches bright white, so I > pulled a piece out of my stack of different kinds of paper sized with > different stuff; this one happened to be Lana sized with gelatin and > glutaraldehyde, and got the kind of fisheyes I'm talking about; I've > scanned that for you. > > I also tried to make the bigger kind of fisheyes, the ones that open > up to 1/4" or 1/2" wide and really look like fisheyes, by coating on > Yupo, but was unsuccessful until I added a little water to the mix, > and then got some of these fisheyes. I took a picture of this with > my cheap digital point and shoot; it's blurry but I hope you can make > it out. I'd be interested to know if people mean one or the other, > or something different, when they refer to "fisheyes." > > In both cases I left the fisheyes as they first appeared rather than > attempting to brush them out, so as to not obscure what they look > like in their undisturbed manifestation. > > http://www.pacifier.com/~kthayer/html/fisheyes.html > > That page is temporary, just uploaded for sake of this particular > discussion. > Katharine > > > On Sep 10, 2008, at 3:01 AM, Laura Valentino wrote: > >> Does anyone have a scan of this "fisheye" effect they could share? >> A couple of weeks ago I wrote about a "bubbling" with payne's gray, >> so I also wondered if it was something related to the pigment. Or >> it could've been because it was a different brand of paint, because >> that was the only variable that changed from the other colors I was >> trying. I washed the layer all away (after learning here I could do >> that) so I can't share the effect I got. >> >> Laura >> >> zphoto@montana.net wrote: >> >> >>> Also, because I get it consistently with magenta and not >>> yellow I think it must have some relation with the coating >>> but maybe not the gum, maybe the pigment or who knows. I'll >>> watch it for a while and see if I can determine any other >>> factor that might play into it. >>> >> >> >
|