U of S | Mailing List Archive | alt-photo-process-l | Re: Tricolor gum, order of layers

Re: Tricolor gum, order of layers

  • To: alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca
  • Subject: Re: Tricolor gum, order of layers
  • From: Loris Medici <mail@loris.medici.name>
  • Date: Fri, 03 Oct 2008 01:25:31 +0300 (EEST)
  • Comments: "alt-photo-process mailing list"
  • Delivered-to: alt-photo-process-l-archive@www.usask.ca
  • Importance: Normal
  • In-reply-to: <7E9DBEB0-6452-4723-8286-DBFEEDAB07B3@pacifier.com>
  • List-id: alt-photo-process mailing list <alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca>
  • References: <50776.><7E9DBEB0-6452-4723-8286-DBFEEDAB07B3@pacifier.com>
  • Reply-to: alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca
  • User-agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.9a

Yes, composite grayscale is exactly grayscale including color inks. With
my printer that means: back + light gray + some (very little I presume)
color ink...

Probably oiling would mask some of the paper texture... I noticed that the
paper you mention is a special photo paper. If I'm not mistaking, the
printers lay much more ink and use a much denser dithering algorithm with
those "photo" papers. Instead, I use a special type of plain paper (which
is quite translucent - and less textured / but there's still some texture
- compared to ordinary plain paper) and I print using the plain paper
profile provided in the printer driver (which lays much less ink and uses
a more visible / relaxed dithering pattern), and I think that's the main
difference leading to my pointillistic result which you haven't observed.

Hope this helps,

1 Ekim 2008, Çarşamba, 12:13 am tarihinde, Katharine Thayer yazmış:
> Hi Loris,
> Aaah, I get it now.  You erased and reprinted the cyan layer.
> Thanks, and sorry for being so dense.
> Hmm,  that's very interesting about the pointillism; by "composite
> grayscale" you mean greyscale printed with color inks, I assume.
> That's how I've always printed my paper negatives, and I haven't ever
> got that effect, except for the one time I mentioned when I used
> pencil to make changes on the paper negative.  I wonder what the
> difference is, whether it's oiled or not, or maybe the kind of
> paper?  The paper that's always worked best for me has been Epson
> Photo Quality Inkjet Paper, (now called  Presentation Paper Matte --
> same stock number, different name), oiled.  I used to use mineral
> oil, til Keith suggested baby oil and I switched over.  Well, it
> doesn't matter, I'm just curious ; I like to try to understand things
> that aren't immediately obvious to me.
> You're most welcome, glad to offer what help  I can, although
> ultimately it's gum that teaches its requirements and principles to
> those who are willing to learn from it; all I can do is point in a
> general direction.
> Katharine