RE: More to see in NYC (Hint: Sookang Kim)

[herr unterberg <phritz-phantom@web.de>]

fine, let's continue the details of the order offlist.  
and thanks vedos for the hint. i know lotus view. i'm from austria and they're pretty close to me. but on one hand, i try to buy from the creator him/herself if possible to, on the other, i have somewhat mixed feelings about that company (please don't aske me to elaborate, it's more or less just a gut feeling and i've ordered from them before and everything went fine). alhtough i'd get the issues from them, if the price difference is big enough and i'd get a thumbs up from judy. 

> Will you share the name of this interesting paper? 
i had left out the details, because i was afraid to get laughed at.  it's a house brand from a local arts shop (most likely a re-branding of some sort). it's big block of watercolor paper and costs 10euro for a hundred sheets. but i'm really satisfied so far and there is really no way i can do 10euro for 8-12 sheets of thick paper all the time. also i was looking for a paper with a very smooth surface, because i wasn't comfortable with the rough texture of the paper i used before (daler-rowney "the langton").
here's a link to the cheap paper:
http://www.boesner.com/boesner/servlet/frontend/articleDetail.html?command=display&btUid=bt_Article&iDf_id=c0a8736c:ae3da8:fd09f42bac:6c9e&TRK_MATR_CE_ID=c0a87361:-5a63d75f:113d890cb4e:-1a4e&TRK_PROJECT_ID=7f001:16e202b0:11521c6eca6:361e&category=Shop%2FPapier%2FAquarellpapier&suchtext=big%20block
(the description only says: french watercolor paper, sized on one side, and suited for all wet techniques)


> As I recall, the 21-step sensitivity guide wasn't available in Europe, nor 
> any real equivalent. My experience is that the *measured* density of such 
> a guide (which you could make yourself digitally) is more useful in tests 
> than the essentially random density of a picture negative.
i made tests using the chart throb script for photoshop and printing out the negs before. i really need to do that again. but sometimes i have a really stupid aversion against systematic testing, i need to be in a special mood to do that. 

> > ..and i 
> > currently use rabbit skin glue as a size.
> 
> That's also on my list -- I'd tried it once and made a mess, but I've 
> decided again to try again.
i ordered the rabbit skin glue more or less by accident (the catalogue said it was the same as "techical gelatin"). my first try was no success either. i tried a thick layer of glue first (15ml of 5% solution for a 24x30cm print, spread out with comb and left to dry). the coating was very messy and uneven. the prints looked horrible. 
the second try was a lot better. a thin coat brushed on seems to work fine. no hardening involved at all. the glue seems to absorb the emulsion quicker than normal gelatin (the thicker the size the more noticable), so it's a little more prone to uneven coating, you have to work a little quicker.

> These were not as far as I know on a website, tho perhaps she's now put 
> them there. When I become sane again, I'll call the gallery to ask...
i found a lot of her work here: http://www.gallery339.com/html/artistresults.asp?artist=33&testing=true

regards,
phritz


> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: "Judy Seigel" <jseigel@panix.com>
> Gesendet: 04.02.09 06:16:52
> An: alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca
> Betreff: RE: More to see in NYC (Hint: Sookang Kim)


> 
> On Tue, 3 Feb 2009, herr unterberg wrote:
> 
> > hi judy, i'm really happy to get such a warm welcome. especially from 
> > you, because i've been wanting to contact you for quite some time to 
> > order the issues of the "post-factory photography" journal. are there 
> > still some left? how much would you charge for the nine + postage to 
> > europe? or do you have them on pdf? (of course not for free, i've read 
> > your writings on that!), just to save time and postage money.  and do 
> > you accept paypal?
> 
> Thanks for the kind words, Phritz, most welcome, since I've spent the last 
> 3 days (again) as Analog Woman in Digital Hell -- the first installment of 
> which appeared in Post-Factory #1, & can be read and downloaded in pdf for 
> free from Malin Fabbri's alternative photography website. (I did have the 
> exact URL for that, but the evil digitons have hidden it, while 
> disconnecting panix on my other partition, turning my hair gray, spoiling 
> the milk, making me shovel snow and then snowing again, etc, etc.)
> 
> However, if you go to alternativephotography.com and then to "books", you 
> should be able to find it. Folks often want the original print version as 
> well (now in digital repro, too), but overseas airmail costing what it 
> does these days, better as light as possible.
> 
> (To prevent whatever good will our small press might garner abroad, the US 
> Post Office has eliminated out-of-country surface mail and raised airmail 
> rates until you could practically come over and get it for less. It's a 
> while since I've e-mailed issues overseas, but I'll ask the PO the current 
> rate --probably more than the issues themselves -- and let you know 
> offlist. And lest I be accused of "commerce" on the list, I'll send other 
> details off list as well.
> 
> I will add, however,  that thanks to Chucky at Unique Copy Shop, I expect 
> another 40 copies of P-F #3 by Friday, completing the set again -- and 
> forever. (I have VOWED not to tempt the digitons EVER again. When Issue #4 
> runs out... enough !)
> 
> > i think i finally had a breakthrough in gum printing yesterday. thanks 
> > to densitometer readings i can finally guesstimate how one sort of 
> > emulsion mix (3 gum (33%) + 1 chromat (am-di saturated) + ß.3gr lamp 
> > black powder + 15ml water) will react to exposure. in opposition to 
> > completely being in the dark before. the first big step was to order 
> > enough quality materials to last me a year or five: gum in chunks, 
> > powder pigment, a paper i can afford (it's cheap, thin (200gr) - i like 
> > that, it curls a little, but it's affordable, stays under the water 
> > surface with the emulsion side up and survives an hour in hot water - 
> > and has two finishes (rough on the front, smooth on the back) ).
> 
> Will you share the name of this interesting paper? Of course it may be 
> available only in Europe, but many are international, as well....  I'll 
> add that, forced by a higher power (finding lost prints for a show) I made 
> the most serious effort in years to clean up my comedy act of chaos in the 
> studio -- and, climbing a ladder to reach the loft to stash a box of 
> VALUABLE trash, not only did not break my neck, but found two large pads 
> of Strathmore archival drawing paper -- PRE-war (WW2) -- that NY Central 
> Artists Materials had spiral bound and I'd bought a bunch of. As I recall, 
> besides pd, pt, VDB & cyano, it was also nice for gum, and your 
> description above reminds me that I intend to try it again.
> 
> > ..and i 
> > currently use rabbit skin glue as a size.
> 
> That's also on my list -- I'd tried it once and made a mess, but I've 
> decided again to try again.
> 
> Meanwhile an old gum print that needed some work has been soaking 
> face-down in water for more than a month -- mold grows on the back.  That 
> wasn't intended, but happened... (I had fine results with 2 days soak in 
> the past -- you can wipe out stuff and recoat, so this could be 15 times 
> as good.)
> 
> > the second step was exposing a negative with two areas: one of lower 
> > density and contras and the upper half (trees against the sky) with more 
> > contrast and density. (i use inkjet-negs btw). after exposure i could 
> > see that the gum in the higher density half came off during development, 
> > but stuck in the lower density area. i compared that to the densitometer 
> > readings and finally realized that i was grossly overexposing all the 
> > time. my exposure for a rather thin neg went down from 4-6 min to 2:40. 
> > here's a scan of a single-layer print: 
> > http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c367/phritz/02.jpg?t=1233627472
> 
> As I recall, the 21-step sensitivity guide wasn't available in Europe, nor 
> any real equivalent. My experience is that the *measured* density of such 
> a guide (which you could make yourself digitally) is more useful in tests 
> than the essentially random density of a picture negative.
> 
> > about sookang kim: i guess i was more thinking of her beautiful prints 
> > of the handbags or cloth bundles, while your comment was more about the 
> > ones with the clothes on the hanger? am i right?
> 
> Apparently not !!! These are plain white dinnerware, like teacups and 
> platters and serving bowls -- which probably sound terribly ho hum, but in 
> this presentation, *only in black and white*, were radiant !!
> 
> i imagined her 
> > printing, for example the stripes on the cloth, like that: print the 
> > whole thing in green, then a layer in a different colour on top 
> > (completely opaque) and brush off the second colour from the areas that 
> > are supposed to be green. like a combination of one-colour prints, 
> > instead of a tri-colour rgb print (with all the colors mixing) . if that 
> > makes any sense.
> 
> These were not as far as I know on a website, tho perhaps she's now put 
> them there. When I become sane again, I'll call the gallery to ask...
> 
> Meanwhile, it's midnight and my fairy godmother has turned my pumpkin into 
> a bed... I'll answer more questions tomorrow.
> 
> for now, best regards, hello to Denmark, and thanks for your interest,
> 
> Judy
> 
> 


_______________________________________________________________________
Jetzt 1 Monat kostenlos! WEB.DE FreeDSL - Telefonanschluss + DSL
für nur 17,95 EURO/mtl.!* http://dsl.web.de/?ac=OM.AD.AD008K13805B7069a