U of S | Mailing List Archive | alt-photo-process-l | Re: theoretical gum question

Re: theoretical gum question

Thanks, Loris, Phritz and Katharine...

I started thinking about this after reading the Lukas Werth article in PF, in which he uses pt/pd-range pyro negs for his casein printing. I know casein is not gum, but reading about him doing up to 10 layers and getting this beautiful long-range print had me daydreaming ;-)

Katharine, when you say they don't look as clean and crisp, do you think that has to do with the contrast?


----- Original Message ----- From: "Katharine Thayer" <kthayer@pacifier.com>
To: <alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca>
Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2009 9:11 PM
Subject: Re: theoretical gum question

Good question.

I've done it both ways, and remain convinced that the best way to print gum, especially if you're interested in a longer print tonal scale than gum can print in one coat, is to stick with the old tried and true method of using a negative with a longer dynamic range and printing two or three times for the different parts of the range. As phritz says, as long as you have to print more than once to get deep open shadows, well-separated midtones, and nicely gradated highlights, why not?

I'll answer the part about tricolor later, because that will take longer, but on that too, I think you're on the right track, at least I made beautiful tricolors for years without matching the negative to the range of the gum, and I'm not convinced that the tricolors I've been making lately, matched to the emulsion and using ChartThrob- generated curves, make better prints than my old standard method, in fact the prints don't have such a clean and crisp look; they're not so tonally satisfying to me in general as the old ones.

As in everything about gum, each to his own.

On Sep 9, 2009, at 11:04 AM, phritz phantom wrote:

Paul Viapiano schrieb:

Same with single neg type gums, should we use a longer scale neg knowing that we're going to print 3 or more times at different times/ratios/etc...?

good question,
i've been wondering about that too. the use of curves would eliminate the use of different exposure times with different contrast performance.
maybe using a too long (for just a single coat) negative and multiple passes yields better results. when using curves, one always (?) tries to get the best possible result within the limits of a single coat.... and then usually (with gum) add more layers anyway.
so, if i'm going to make more than one coat anyway, why should i aim for a optimal neg for single coat?

(i hope this does not sound critical of certain ways of working. i'm just curious.)