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.
On 10/9/08 18:28, "Katharine Thayer" <firstname.lastname@example.org> 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.
> That page is temporary, just uploaded for sake of this particular
> 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.
>> email@example.com 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.