Re: Printing gum with little pigment
Thanks for sharing these Marek. I regularly print gum from negatives calibrated for Cyanotype, something like log 1.5 ES (= 15 steps with the 31-step tablet - each step = log 0.1) using weak / weak-moderate pigment concentrations, getting full detail starting from shadows up to the highlights. So I definitely believe in less pigment = more range -> it's in parallel to my experience... Regards, Loris. 16 Ocak 2009, Cuma, 7:33 pm tarihinde, Marek Matusz yazmış: > > Hi all > I was waiting for a dry spell to bring this up. A while back Judy made a > statement that printing gum with little or no pigment allows for a very > extended range. I looked back through the Post Factory issues and really > could not find examples. Hey Judy thanks for sparking my interest. > Since I was messing around with the post-flash and was getting good > results in extending tonal range of the print I decided to do some > experimentation and actually print some test prints. > http://picasaweb.google.com/marekmatusz1/ExtendedGumRange# > > Two sets of tests are done with same water/gum/dichromate but different > pigment concentrations. I have made different exposures and tested two > development times. I used indantrone blue which is a wonderful dark blue > and non-staining. I can not see that low pigment concentration extends the > rane of gum print, to the contrary it allows less steps to be separated on > a standard step tablet. One of the tests is also a good illustration of > how delicate highlights with dark shadows can be printed with the same > negative with the postflash. > Anybody else want to chime in. It would be great to see some > illustrations. A picture is worth a thousand words. > This contrast vs. pigment issue has been on my mind for a while. > Marek
|