Re: Was Re: question on sizing, now fish eyes
In a post which I didn't receive so can't reply to directly, the word
"experiment" was used to describe what I posted below. No, that
wasn't an experiment, nor did I claim it to be an experiment..
There was no comparison, no systematic manipulation of selected
variables, no ruling out of other variables, none of the requisite
elements of an experiment. It was simply an illustration--- (what do
fisheyes look like? They look like this) That's all.
On Sep 10, 2008, at 10:28 AM, Katharine Thayer 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
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.
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.