[alt-photo] Re: COT320

Sat Feb 16 20:54:21 GMT 2013

DEAR ALL,
	This, once again, appears to be a case of, "Rumors of my demise have
been greatly exaggerated" (Mark Twain).  I recall a few years ago, when B&S
stopped carrying COT 320, rumors flew that it was no longer made.  I
contacted John at Bergger USA and he had plenty of stock in all sizes and
more on the way.  I ordered directly from him and received it quickly...well
quickly for Barbados!  LOL!  I have ordered lots from him at various times
and he has always had stock.
	Now, because there is the problem of grain, and I believe Diana that
there is a problem with the batch she bought, we are once again relegating
COT 320 to the scrap heap.  Why not demonstrate to those like John at
Bergger that we are logical, technically sophisticated, craft-persons and
find out exactly what the problem is?  I don't recall where Diana got that
batch but, if the art merchant who sold it to her stored it in a hot, dry
place, it may well have changed the paper significantly.  This would even
explain the difference Diane found between the older COT and this newer
"problem batch".  We all also know that paper may eventually stabilize in
terms of humidity but, as I said, if the paper was stored at extremely low
rel hum and high room temps, it might need some help.
	Which brings me to; Diana, did you ever try humidifying this grainy
batch of COT **before** coating?  I don't usually have to, living in a very
humid place, but it might be an interesting experiment to humidify it before
coating, coat it and proceed with your normal steps.  I would love to hear
the results.

			CHEERS FROM BARBADOS!
				BOB

-----Original Message-----
From: alt-photo-process-list-bounces at lists.altphotolist.org
[mailto:alt-photo-process-list-bounces at lists.altphotolist.org] On Behalf Of
EJ Photo
Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2013 3:08 PM
To: 'The alternative photographic processes mailing list'
Subject: [alt-photo] Re: COT320

This has really been the history of papers for platinum printers since I
started back in 82. This is really nothing new. It does turn us into paper
conservators in a way. Simply buying a batch does not mean that it will
print the same today as it will in 4 years. Environmental things pop up.
Many years back a list member shared a problem with paper that used to work
but no longer had trouble free printing. Source was later identified as a
fragrance added to the room's dust removal system. 

Coating issues and pH balance. Is it any wonder that new printers are
confused and looking for a silver bullet and not the one from Colorado with
hot chicks and trains ; )  

Eric Neilsen
Eric Neilsen Photography
4101 Commerce Street, Suite 9
Dallas, TX 75226

www.ericneilsenphotography.com
skype me with ejprinter
Let's Talk Photography

-----Original Message-----
From: alt-photo-process-list-bounces at lists.altphotolist.org
[mailto:alt-photo-process-list-bounces at lists.altphotolist.org] On Behalf Of
clay harmon's personal website email account
Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2013 7:47 AM
To: The alternative photographic processes mailing list
Subject: [alt-photo] Re: COT320

This discussion about paper variability brings up a subject that can be a
little touchy in my household. 

I believe my spouse views me as having some hoarder tendencies, but if I
find a paper that really works well, I will buy a fair quantity of it and
store it in my flat files. Over the last dozen years or so, we have lost so
many good papers, and others have had manufacturing changes that render them
anywhere from difficult to useless for our purposes.  

Platinotype: gone
Weston Diploma Parchment - wild batch variation in later years - I think it
may be totally gone now
Platine :  lots of batch-to-batch variation
Fabriano Artistico EW - more and more buffer being added it seems - newer
batches have required some serious acidification
Whatman's Watercolor and Printmaking paper - gone
Atlantis Silversafe : gone
Staedtler-Mars drafting vellum: tremendous batch variation
Swiss Opaline - gone

And now we are seeing these reports that COT320,  which heretofore has been
a model of consistency may not be...

And the list is much larger than that. These are just ones I know about. It
seems that when it comes to paper that just because it works well or is
available today is absolutely no guarantee that it will be tomorrow.

Let's keep our fingers crossed that Revere both will be around for a while
and will be more consistent that it has to date.

So how is that for some Saturday morning hoarder rationalization?

-Clay

On Feb 16, 2013, at 8:18 AM, Diana Bloomfield <dlhbloomfield at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hey Keith,
> 
> You know, when John told me that in all the (one thousand+) years Bergger
has been making that paper, that no one (NO ONE) has ever lodged a
complaint, I was totally flabbergasted..  While it is true that I do tend to
complain an inordinate amount-- about every little thing--  I still found
that very hard to believe-- and, yes-- transparently disingenuous.
Additionally, shouldn't I win a prize or something (at least a new pack of
paper all tied up with a red ribbon) for being the very first?  And,
seriously, if I had a dollar for every time a company rep has said that to
me . . . 
> 
> I did write back and very nicely explained the first rule of business to
him (the customer is always right).  Well, I probably didn't say it all that
nicely. There's really no nice way to say that to someone.  But, for
heaven's sake.  He wrote me back a second time and said he was sorry to lose
me as a customer, but offered to send me a new pack of paper (and, again, to
send my bad prints to France for a professional evaluation).   
> 
> Yes-- I really like the Revere very much.  
> 
> Thanks, Keith.
> 
> -Diana
> 
> 
> On Feb 16, 2013, at 1:23 AM, Keith Schreiber wrote:
> 
>> Hi Diana,
>> 
>> So I guess that means he won't count Bob's & your complaints as "recorded
issues", eh? Don't acknowledge the problem therefore it doesn't exist.
Lovely logic. Actually, I think he is being a bit disingenuous since I
remember discussion, here or on one of the other forums, about variable
quality of COT320 in the past complete with batch numbers and I think he was
a participant in that discussion.
>> 
>> Some time ago I think I mentioned here about the 22x30 COT320 that I
special ordered thru B&S. It had cut edges like all COT320 and looked like
every other sheet of that paper that I have ever used or seen, but it also
had the Arches Platine watermark on every sheet. (I suppose Horowy would
deny too!) Unfortunately, it didn't print as well as I needed and it was to
complete a portfolio project so I returned it to B&S. 
>> 
>> Looking forward to trying Revere again.
>> 
>> ~ Keith
>> 
>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Alt-photo-process-list | http://altphotolist.org/listinfo

_______________________________________________
Alt-photo-process-list | http://altphotolist.org/listinfo

_______________________________________________
Alt-photo-process-list | http://altphotolist.org/listinfo

__________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature
database 8018 (20130216) __________

The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.

http://www.eset.com