[alt-photo] Re: pigment problem
Julian Smart
juliansmart at virginmedia.com
Tue Feb 8 00:10:26 GMT 2011
Hi Katherine, thanks for the reply.
I had sort of come to the conclusion that it may be a sizing issue. Trouble
is I have no precedent for my problem in that I have only just started to
use this paint and have just recently modified my sizing technique. I now
size with a hardened gelatine, that is I add 2 drops of formaldehyde to a
100ml of gelatine just prior to brush coating the size. I really wouldn't
have thought that this would be a problem, or cause problems with different
pigments, though I have noticed that the gelatine has hardened enough by the
time I am sizing my fourth sheet to not allow a decently smooth coat.
Tomorrow I will try a different pigment, probably the Indanthrone you
suggest and see how it goes.
Julian.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Katharine Thayer" <kthayer at pacifier.com>
To: "The alternative photographic processes mailing list"
<alt-photo-process-list at lists.altphotolist.org>
Sent: Monday, February 07, 2011 11:08 PM
Subject: [alt-photo] Re: pigment problem
> Hi Julian, well, first a point of clarification about pigment names:
> you're not printing with indigo pigment. Indigo is PB 66, a pigment so
> fugitive that it is no longer used in any watercolor brands (Winsor &
> Newton was the last to discontinue it, about five years ago or so, if I
> remember right). All paints named "indigo" nowadays aren't actually
> indigo but are convenience mixes of other pigments, mixed in an effort to
> replicate an indigo hue, and to follow traditional naming convention,
> they should all be named "indigo hue" rather than "indigo," IMO. But
> never mind about that.
>
> While I often mix pigments myself for my own purposes, I try to avoid
> convenience mixtures where I don't have any choice over what pigments are
> used. I have found some pigment mixtures that produce a split tone
> effect in themselves (I'd have to go back to the archives to be reminded
> of what those were, since I've never gone on to use them in my work) in
> other words one of the pigments in the mix will be more evident in the
> lighter tones and the other pigment in the darker tones. If you're
> interested in what those pigments were, I'm sure I reported it to the
> list when I made that observation, so it should be in the archives
> somewhere.
>
> What you've got here is phthalo mixed with quinacridone rose, apparently
> to shift the blue more to the red side, plus lamp black to darken it.
> If it were me and I were looking for an indigo-like hue, I would use a
> single pigment that is close to that hue rather than a mixture.
> Indanthrone, PB 60, is a very close approximation to indigo.
>
> All that said, I'm not entirely convinced from your description that your
> problem is related to pigment, however; it sounds to me more a problem of
> adhesion, or tooth, in other words that the layer isn't attaching to the
> paper as it should. It would help to be able to see exactly what you're
> talking about, but if the layer is hardening properly but then frilling
> and lifting off, that's most likely to be related to an inadequate
> "purchase" of the gum layer on the paper. So that's the line I would
> pursue in trying to solve the problem, look at issues of sizing, paper,
> prior layers, to see if there's something that is interfering with there
> being enough tooth left available to attach that third layer.
>
> Katharine
>
More information about the Alt-photo-process-list
mailing list