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

Re: Tricolor gum, order of layers



Loris, how long are your exposure with that un-oiled 18 lb bond?

2008/10/3 Keith Gerling <keith.gerling@gmail.com>:
> Freedom Paper also sells an inkjet vellum that makes a pretty good
> negative.  I don't use it much because it doesn't seem to absorb as
> much black as the cheaper bond, but it needs no oiling (exposure times
> for me are the same as for the oiled 18 pound - which are almost
> exactly half as long as un-oiled) and there is little or no "paper
> grain" with the vellum.
>
> http://www.freedompaper.com/s.nl/it.I/id.49/.f?sc=15&category=-115
>
> 2008/10/3  <john@johnbrewerphotography.com>:
>> Thanks Loris
>>
>> J
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Loris Medici [mailto:mail@loris.medici.name]
>> Sent: 03 October 2008 09:58
>> To: alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca
>> Subject: RE: Tricolor gum, order of layers
>>
>> HP sells a paper called translucent inkjet bond. Mine is from
>> freedompaper.com. It's a 18lb smooth paper which looks like a bolder
>> drafting/tracing paper (it has some size I presume since it's marketed as
>> inkjet media).
>>
>> Hope this helps,
>> Loris.
>>
>>
>> 3 Ekim 2008, Cuma, 11:05 am tarihinde, john@johnbrewerphotography.com
>> yazmış:
>>> Hi Loris
>>>
>>> Could you describe the paper you use for negatives a little more? You
>>> say it is quite translucent, Is it like draughting film (paper) or
>>> velum ? Who is the manufacturer? Pictorico here in the UK is expensive
>>> too.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>> John.
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Loris Medici [mailto:mail@loris.medici.name]
>>> Sent: 02 October 2008 23:26
>>> To: alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca
>>> Subject: Re: Tricolor gum, order of layers
>>>
>>> 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,
>>> Loris.
>>>
>>>
>>> 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
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>>> Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
>>> Version: 8.0.173 / Virus Database: 270.7.5/1703 - Release Date:
>>> 10/2/2008
>>> 7:46 AM
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>> Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
>> Version: 8.0.173 / Virus Database: 270.7.5/1703 - Release Date: 10/2/2008
>> 9:35 PM
>>
>>
>