Re: More to see in NYC (Hint: Sookang Kim) (fwd)

[Keith Gerling <keith.gerling@gmail.com>]

Hi Sookang,

Thank you for answering our questions.  It continues to amaze me how
many ways people find to print gum.

Your work is gorgeous.  I wish I could see it in person.

Keith

On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 8:41 PM, Judy Seigel <jseigel@panix.com> wrote:
>
> I forwarded our discussion about her process to Sookang (and am going to
> forward getting on the list), and here's her reply... which may be clearer,
> and certainly more authentic, than my guesses:  But I also understand that
> the Sepia Gallery on 24th St -- even after the current show is over -- has
> some of Sookang's prints on hand, and will show them on request.
>
> But anyway this discussion would make a LOT more sense if you've seen the
> prints... There are also a bunch of other great shows in NYC now, including
> at the Whitney & Metropolitan. (They probably do that on purpose when the
> wweather is WORST) if someone needs extra incentive to visit.
> J.
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2009 08:35:00 +0000
> From: sookang kim <sookang@hotmail.com>
> To: Judy Seigel <jseigel@panix.com>, alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca
> Subject: RE: More to see in NYC (Hint: Sookang Kim) (fwd)
>
> Hello Judy and Keith,
>
> Thank you for your reply.
>
> Here's the answer to your question.
>
> I usually develop the print with high water pressure from the hose
> especailly when I want very rough texture.
>
> First of all, I put really small amount of black pigment in the emulsion for
> the prints at Sepia show. And exposed it to the ultraviolet light for 3
> minutes. And put the paper into the water and left it for over 2~3 hours.
> The image was perfect without any grain then. At that point, I broke the
> smooth emulsion surface with high water pressure, which made surface rough
> and at the same time the image got extremely pale and weak because most of
> the pigment was washed away to make rough texture. That one coat was too
> weak to make enough density, so I repeated the same process 4 times more.
> The reason why I put very small amount of pigment is to make a light gray,
> not heavy one. I needed light gray with full density.
>
> Hope this answer is clear to you...
>
> Best,
> Sookang
>
>
>
>
>
>
>> Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 23:39:29 -0500> From: jseigel@panix.com> To:
>> sookang@hotmail.com> Subject: Re: More to see in NYC (Hint: Sookang Kim)
>> (fwd)> > > #2> ---------- Forwarded message ----------> Date: Thu, 15 Jan
>> 2009 22:39:35 -0500 (EST)> From: Judy Seigel <jseigel@panix.com>> To:
>> alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca> Subject: Re: More to see in NYC (Hint: Sookang
>> Kim)> > > On Thu, 15 Jan 2009, Keith Gerling wrote:> > > Judy,> > > > I'm
>> not being skeptical here, as I certainly trust your impressions,> > but why
>> the need for 5 coats of one color? What do you think> > physically is
>> different about a print when the pigment is added in> > small doses? Not
>> that it isn't intriguing...> > > > Keith> > Actually, Keith, that's a good
>> question... which didn't occur to me at the > time, because looking at the
>> delicacy of the prints, it seemed perfectly > understandable. Now, called
>> upon to *explain*, I come up with this:> > If you look at a 21- step test
>> print of a "regular" gum exposure,
>
>  you see that > gum has a short scale, with a steep slope. That is, the
> average strip with an > average mix/exposure has maybe 5 or 6 steps from
> "D-max" to paper white. Of > course you can get a longer scale by cutting
> down on the pigment -- and, if > memory serves, an exposure with no pigment
> at all could show maybe 15 or even > 17 steps of dichromate stain.> > Now I
> figure that these prints, with their very delicate gradation (from almost >
> white to a complex gray made up of widely spaced "pieces" of black, in a way
>> like an enlargement of pixels, except the dots aren't identical circles,
> but > irregular shapes, which, in the setting, function as "black"), got
> that way by > putting several delicate coats, all in the same black pigment,
> on top of one > another.> > Each of those widely spaced irregular "dots"
> (inflected by the texture of the > paper) is, if you get close to it, quite
> black, but, because they're widely > spaced, you see areas as gray, or
> *grays*. Just one co
> a
>  t of such "dots" would > have been too weak to do much, let alone give the
> *effect* of full tone, or the > outlines of objects, which, in 5 coats,
> become "black outlines." I gather, > however, that the process wasn't
> something Sookang figured out and then did, > but arrived at by a lot of
> trial and error, feeling her way to what "worked."> > I'm not sure that's
> the full/best explanation, but figure it's along those > lines.... Hope it
> makes sense...> > Judy
> _________________________________________________________________
> Invite your mail contacts to join your friends list with Windows Live
> Spaces. It's easy!
> http://spaces.live.com/spacesapi.aspx?wx_action=create&wx_url=/friends.aspx&mkt=en-us
>