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

[Peter Blackburn]

Thanks, Jeremy. No, I'm not into dry mounting, but will try at least a couple of prints anyway. This is all good stuff! Peter 

 > Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2012 11:52:22 -0600
> From: alt.photosbyjeremy at gmail.com
> To: alt-photo-process-list at lists.altphotolist.org
> Subject: [alt-photo] Re: Clearprint Vellum 1020 vs 1000H
> 
> I end up drymounting my finished pt/pd prints to watercolor paper and buff
> it up with a coat or three of renaissance wax. Makes for a lovely print,
> but if you're not a fan of drymounting Kerik is right and that sucker will
> always be wavy.
> 
> -jeremy-
> 
> On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 11:35 AM, Peter Blackburn
> <blackburnap at hotmail.com>wrote:
> 
> >
> > Yes, you're right, Kerik. After looking a prices again from different
> > sources, vellum and other typical art papers are competitive
> > price-wise—that's good. Maybe it was the brand of vellum I used for
> > negatives, but sometimes handling them with damp hands, as is sometimes the
> > case in my workflow, made the edges warp profoundly. #1 wouldn't be an
> > issue for me as I don't print pt/pd—love looking at it, though! #2 would
> > get on my nerves which is why I print on 300lb paper for gallery work. Dry
> > mounting? I'd wear garlic, hang mirrors, and display crosses—anything to
> > ward off the dry mounting press! Just a little humor.    I most likely will
> > try a tricolor gum image or tow on heavy vellum in the near future for the
> > experience. Thanks, Kerik, for your time and response!
> >
> > Peter
> >
> >  > Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2012 11:10:47 -0600
> > > From: kerik at kerik.com
> > > To: alt-photo-process-list at lists.altphotolist.org
> > > Subject: [alt-photo] Re: Clearprint Vellum 1020 vs 1000H
> > >
> > > In general, the vellum papers are quite robust, especially the
> > > Clearprint line.
> > >
> > > http://www.clearprintpaperco.com/media/vellums.html
> > >
> > > They have good wet strength and are pretty easy to work with. The
> > > heavier ones tend to be better for bigger prints. I've printed as large
> > > as 14x17 and 12x20 on these. If a third party spills a drop of water, it
> > > will dry off like any other paper. No harm done. They are also quite
> > > inexpensive compared to many papers we use for alternative processes.
> > >
> > > The two hassles for me with vellums are: 1) they can be subject to
> > > black spots for those who print pt/pd and 2) they will never again be
> > > perfectly flat when they dry. No matter how much drying and flattening
> > > you do, they tend to get a little wrinkly as they breathe with the temp
> > > and humidity of where they are displayed. This can be overcome by
> > > drymounting, but that take away some of the wonderful translucency. The
> > > wrinkling doesn't bother me.
> > >
> > > -Kerik
> > >
> > > > 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
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Alt-photo-process-list | http://altphotolist.org/listinfo
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Alt-photo-process-list | http://altphotolist.org/listinfo
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Alt-photo-process-list | http://altphotolist.org/listinfo
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Alt-photo-process-list | http://altphotolist.org/listinfo