Re: Masa-gum question for Keith Gerling
No badmouthing, here. I just have never practiced fastidious fussiness nor do I seek determined measured consistency like many - and I suffer the consequences and reap the rewards. It could be said that Pollock or Dolphy are also fast and sloppy. I haven't surrendered control by allowing chance into my work. I still make the decisions about when and where the "painterly gestures" are allowed to happen (It doesn't work well when it collides with a body or face, for instance) and I retain the right to decide which prints are mounted and which become fuel. As I said before, most wind up in the stove and that is all the more reason for using something cheap like masa or tarpaper or something re-usable like aluminum. On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 6:28 PM, Katharine Thayer <kthayer@pacifier.com> wrote: > Hey, no fair destroying my illusions. The way I look at it, if it works, > don't badmouth it, just call it a happy accident if you must. Anyway, I > like the effect, however created, and may be working on developing a > similarly "fast and sloppy" technique to see if I can replicate it. > > And yes, I did notice, on looking them over, that some are tricolor gum and > others are gum over cyanotype. Thanks for all your patient answers to > questions, > Katharine > > > > On Sep 23, 2008, at 2:46 PM, Keith Gerling wrote: > >> regarding your "I love the >> >>> painterly gestures you've incorporated into the backgrounds of your >>> prints, >>> which I'm guessing are at least partly enabled by the characteristics of >>> the >>> paper." >>> >> >> Thank you, but I rarely introduce intentional painterly gestures, >> rather they are a result of fast and sloppy work! If you are >> referring to works such as this: >> http://www.gumphoto.com/masa/pages/dance49.htm >> >> then those red streaks are just areas where the hasty application of >> emulsion (made prior to my dilution of the mix) caused the emulsion to >> sink into the paper and stay there, whereas much of the rest of the >> magenta unfortunately (or fortunately?) washed away. Other similar >> flaws can be seen here http://www.gumphoto.com/masa/pages/dance55.htm >> and here http://www.gumphoto.com/masa/pages/dance060.htm. Streaks >> like that can be avoided by careful application of the emulsion with a >> roller. That is why I choose to use a brush. I cannot say that the >> artifacts are the result of the paper, except to say that the paper >> thin nature encourages a rapid coating. >> >> And yes, I size with gelatin. BTW, the majority of those dancer >> pictures were gum over cyanotype. >> >> >> On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 3:47 PM, Katharine Thayer <kthayer@pacifier.com> >> wrote: >> >>> >>> On Sep 23, 2008, at 11:10 AM, Keith Gerling wrote: >>> >>> >>>> Thanks! >>>> >>>> There are disadvantages working with masa, but the price makes up for >>>> them. With masa you actually get two papers, as the rough side and >>>> the smooth side are completely different. There are actually a few >>>> interesting little surprises that await those willing to experiment. >>>> >>> >>> I look forward to discovering those, I think? :--). I love the >>> painterly gestures you've incorporated into the backgrounds of your >>> prints, >>> which I'm guessing are at least partly enabled by the characteristics of >>> the >>> paper. Have you been a painter, too? Your work is very painterly, and I >>> mean that as a compliment. >>> >>> Actually, not that it matters, but just for the record, I think I may >>> have >>> been the first to try printing gum on masa, or at least to report it on >>> the >>> list. Loris, I think, posted some cyanotype on masa and someone asked >>> me >>> offlist if I'd ever tried gum on masa. I said no, I never had, but I had >>> some masa and would try it just for the heck, and I did and posted it >>> that >>> afternoon. That was... (checking the creation date on the page, which >>> I've >>> since taken offline)...gosh, nearly two years ago. how time flies. I >>> didn't bother to size it, and found the nappy side very difficult to coat >>> smoothly, but the smooth side coated beautifully and easily and printed >>> well >>> too, at least for one coat, which was all I did. I commented that it >>> was a >>> delight to find a really smooth paper that was easy to coat (Arches >>> bright >>> white, unlike most other HP watercolor papers, is a real PITA to coat >>> evenly, though I love the smoothness of its tones once printed) and that >>> the >>> speed of drying was a big plus, in addition to the price. I never took >>> it >>> any farther than that, myself, and now that I want to, I can't find any >>> masa >>> in my flat file. Grr. >>> >>> By the way, as a general note (file under "do as I say, not as I do") I >>> would caution people to always write in pencil at the edge of odd papers >>> you >>> might accumulate over the years, what they are, if it's not evident from >>> a >>> watermark. Going through my flat file today, I've found any number of >>> one-sheet-of-a-kind papers that I have no idea what they are. >>> Katharine >>> >>> >> >> > >
|