RE: Tricolor gum, order of layers
Thanks Keith J -----Original Message----- From: Keith Gerling [mailto:keith.gerling@gmail.com] Sent: 03 October 2008 13:15 To: alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca Subject: Re: Tricolor gum, order of layers 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 > > 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: 10/3/2008 8:18 AM
|