[alt-photo] Re: Clearprint Vellum 1020 vs 1000H

[Peter Blackburn]

Hi Kerik: My question for you is do you find working with vellum is bit "chancy?" I've only worked with lighter weights of vellum in the past for negative production and not the heavier weights. I've never printed on it. It certainly has a marvelous, smooth surface for printing, but it seems it doesn't take much to crease, crinkle and wrinkle. And what happens should a second party spill a drop of water on it?  I have the impression, maybe wrongly, that vellum is "high maintenance" in addition to being a bit hard on the wallet, especially in the heavier weights. Thanks for your input!
Peter J. Blackburn

 > Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2012 10:21:45 -0600
> From: kerik at kerik.com
> To: alt-photo-process-list at lists.altphotolist.org
> Subject: [alt-photo] Re: Clearprint Vellum 1020 vs 1000H
> 
> Yep, I've used it and it works great. There is also a 1025 that is even 
> a little thicker.
> 
> -Kerik
> 
> 
> > Since we're talking about vellum printing, has anyone tried the 
> > Clearprint
> > 1020 vellum?
> >
> > This is a 20lb version of the 16lb 1000H which I have printed on. I 
> > have
> > printed up to 12" x 15" on the 1000H, but am thinking the 20lb might 
> > be a
> > much better bet for going any larger. I am hoping (*fingers* crossed) 
> > it
> > works like the 1000H but is a little easier to work with when wet; 
> > has
> > anyone printed on the 1020?
> >
> > I will be ordering a stack of paper in March so I am trying to get my
> > bearing with what to purchase now.
> >
> > Thanks!
> > Jeremy
> > _______________________________________________
> > Alt-photo-process-list | http://altphotolist.org/listinfo
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Alt-photo-process-list | http://altphotolist.org/listinfo