From emanphoto at gmail.com Tue Oct 1 03:58:30 2013 From: emanphoto at gmail.com (eric nelson) Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2013 10:58:30 +0700 Subject: [Alt-photo] Fwd: Mark and Cindy Hill In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Delivered-To: emanphoto at gmail.com Received: by 10.223.195.197 with SMTP id ed5csp112713fab; Mon, 30 Sep 2013 08:03:12 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.68.229.2 with SMTP id sm2mr24195805pbc.68.1380553391651; Mon, 30 Sep 2013 08:03:11 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: Received: from mail-pd0-f177.google.com (mail-pd0-f177.google.com [209.85.192.177]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id uh1si710409pac.24.1969.12.31.16.00.00 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 30 Sep 2013 08:03:11 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of madill1 at ucs.br designates 209.85.192.177 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.192.177; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of madill1 at ucs.br designates 209.85.192.177 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=madill1 at ucs.br Received: by mail-pd0-f177.google.com with SMTP id y10so5733397pdj.8 for ; Mon, 30 Sep 2013 08:03:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:reply-to:date:message-id:subject :from:to:content-type; bh=sBMcJfiMHWcE1naVz2FVCJkFnAHO3ct3EFQejB0rHJE=; b=QOgLoPM8BvPNyykvdLuYLvU6KgkUj1eWGzmXJfJ9LayRHiyWGEg8fKT9nvqMpr6W0d luIGEJHLCZfmbbKRro7+4b8ZGfDZaXxRuDTPAHIwKRe8LDLxeQKBH2G17bRJ3/WVRfpc dOJ+HoC3qWwJ07ffXci2kxi3V0QyBV1rOzUzEfHHTiMIe5EuAIUwbwY9A8QeFAx+ykXm FjrNbHpcfVhoUHslkF6/HfcNdGBhWWGw1yvEr9FUrITTnv9vm5/TZz7EOUHVjibQnJ2e 3DWOGGIJJToMzaXvXc5QcAErD6KKRTsx+TRdMknZKpBI05c7mc3foSna9i8u0JHHcqSD Swlw== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmH4FzeXjCJ1WCND6ajn3FGXStxerVLoML1ngOvl0UX9F3FNpTX77/seszfOqTS7/D6apT3b7icw4fcvl52Xc3avUctO1p04ohJR8SaTx0yzz5chSw= MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.66.25.232 with SMTP id f8mr28856645pag.25.1380553390472; Mon, 30 Sep 2013 08:03:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.68.182.98 with HTTP; Mon, 30 Sep 2013 08:03:10 -0700 (PDT) Reply-To: cindy-hill at qq.com Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2013 13:03:10 -0200 Message-ID: Subject: Mark and Cindy Hill From: Mark and Cindy Hill To: undisclosed-recipients:; Bcc: emanphoto at gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII I saw your email address during the course of my research i Mark and my wife Cindy Hill, Missouri won a Jackpot and we have solely decided to donate the sum of 850,000.00 USD to Five lucky individuals who will in turn use 50% of the total funds to assist the less privileged. If you are the intended receiver of this email fill the below details so that we can confirm your details and send to the payout bank. 1.Name: 2.Address 3.Sex 4.Country You can verify this by visiting the web pages below. Site:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/25/missouri-powerball-winner_n_2749795.html Email:cindy-hill at qq.com Regards Mark and Cindy Hill -- Enviado via UCSMail. From workshops at polychrome.nl Tue Oct 1 07:40:07 2013 From: workshops at polychrome.nl (Kees Brandenburg) Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2013 09:40:07 +0200 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: Mark and Cindy Hill | => please discard original message! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1910DAFF-6A93-4E54-80B8-8182F38909BE@polychrome.nl> Hi, I am sorry the first message with this tittle, a spam message, made it to the list. Please don't click on links and discard it. Unfortunately the combination of Eric Nelson's e-mail address ?nd list subscription fell in the wrong hands or were caught by a virus/spambot. I switched moderation on (again) for the address. regards, kees From alt.list at albertonovo.it Tue Oct 1 09:40:09 2013 From: alt.list at albertonovo.it (Alberto Novo) Date: Tue, 01 Oct 2013 11:40:09 +0200 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: =?iso-8859-1?q?Mark_and_Cindy_Hill_=7C_=3D=3E_please_discard_?= =?iso-8859-1?q?original__message!?= In-Reply-To: <1910DAFF-6A93-4E54-80B8-8182F38909BE@polychrome.nl> References: <1910DAFF-6A93-4E54-80B8-8182F38909BE@polychrome.nl> Message-ID: <20131001094009.27217.qmail@webmaildh4.aruba.it> In the last months, at least in Europe, there have been many fake messages though a little different from this. What they all have in common is a gmail stolen account. > Hi, > > I am sorry the first message with this tittle, a spam message, made it to the list. Please don't click on links and discard it. > Unfortunately the combination of Eric Nelson's e-mail address ?nd list subscription fell in the wrong hands or were caught by a virus/spambot. > I switched moderation on (again) for the address. > > regards, > > kees Alberto www.facebook.com/alberto.novo.1 www.grupponamias.com www.alternativephotography.com/wp/photographers/rodolfo-namias-group From fotodave at dsoemarko.us Tue Oct 1 15:25:06 2013 From: fotodave at dsoemarko.us (Dave S) Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2013 11:25:06 -0400 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: Mark and Cindy Hill | => please discard original message! In-Reply-To: <1910DAFF-6A93-4E54-80B8-8182F38909BE@polychrome.nl> References: <1910DAFF-6A93-4E54-80B8-8182F38909BE@polychrome.nl> Message-ID: <001c01cebeba$68bca0f0$3a35e2d0$@dsoemarko.us> That is ok. I did read it, but I get million-dollar offers almost every day so this $850,000.00 didn't attract me at all. :-) Dave S -----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 Kees Brandenburg Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2013 3:40 AM To: alt-photo-process-list at lists.altphotolist.org Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: Mark and Cindy Hill | => please discard original message! Hi, I am sorry the first message with this tittle, a spam message, made it to the list. Please don't click on links and discard it. Unfortunately the combination of Eric Nelson's e-mail address ?nd list subscription fell in the wrong hands or were caught by a virus/spambot. I switched moderation on (again) for the address. regards, kees _______________________________________________ Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org From christinazanderson at gmail.com Sun Oct 6 18:31:39 2013 From: christinazanderson at gmail.com (Christina Anderson) Date: Sun, 6 Oct 2013 12:31:39 -0600 Subject: [Alt-photo] Ernest Theisen Message-ID: <9129CC66-E9DF-48C4-A41F-377593F06849@gmail.com> Does anyone know if Ernest Theisen is on this list or still around? I have tried to contact him through his website and unblinkingeye to no avail. Chris Christina Z. Anderson http://christinaZanderson.com/ From jacqueskv at gmail.com Mon Oct 7 08:18:56 2013 From: jacqueskv at gmail.com (Jacques Kevers) Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2013 10:18:56 +0200 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: Ernest Theisen In-Reply-To: <9129CC66-E9DF-48C4-A41F-377593F06849@gmail.com> References: <9129CC66-E9DF-48C4-A41F-377593F06849@gmail.com> Message-ID: Christina, Haven't heard from him since quite a long time. He lives in Hawai now. You can find him (and message) on Facebook. https://www.facebook.com/ernest.theisen?fref=ts Best, Jacques 2013/10/6 Christina Anderson > Does anyone know if Ernest Theisen is on this list or still around? I have > tried to contact him through his website and unblinkingeye to no avail. > Chris > > Christina Z. Anderson > http://christinaZanderson.com/ > > _______________________________________________ > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > From archfot at postafiok.hu Mon Oct 7 09:46:25 2013 From: archfot at postafiok.hu (Archfoto) Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2013 11:46:25 +0200 Subject: [Alt-photo] Getty: Turning Over An Old Leaf Message-ID: Turning Over An Old Leaf: Thomas Wedgwood, Humphry Davy, and Their Early Experiments in Photography The Leaf Thursday, December 5, 2013 Getty Center http://www.getty.edu/conservation/publications_resources/public_programs/turning_over.html From thomas.weynants at telenet.be Mon Oct 7 20:07:25 2013 From: thomas.weynants at telenet.be (Thomas Weynants - Media Archaeology -) Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2013 22:07:25 +0200 Subject: [Alt-photo] Stereo daguerreotype Message-ID: <00a001cec398$d74dd290$85e977b0$@telenet.be> Just found an anonymous stereo daguerreotype on an annual flea-market and included was also a Brewster handheld stereoscope. It would be great to identify the photographer and possibly also the woman. See: http://www.visual-media.eu/stereo-images.html She's wearing highly glossy jewelry (earrings and necklace with pearls) which is unfortunately not visible on the reproduction I made very fast without a tripod. The daguerreotype is very sharp. Please feel free to pass on my query to other expert in a search for a possible identification. All best, Thomas www.visual-media.eu From fdfragomeni at gmail.com Tue Oct 8 04:35:55 2013 From: fdfragomeni at gmail.com (Francesco Fragomeni) Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2013 00:35:55 -0400 Subject: [Alt-photo] Zeiss C Biogon 35mm f2.8 T* for Sale Message-ID: Hi all, I know a lot of you are Leica shooters so I thought I'd pass this along to the group in case anyone is interested. I've got a Zeiss C Biogon 35mm f2.8 T* for Leica M mount up for sale. Killer little lens but I can only keep one 35mm so I'm letting this one go to a new home. If you're interested you can contact me directly to make an offer and avoid the ebay hassle if you'd like. Here is the link . Best, Francesco From bobkiss at caribsurf.com Tue Oct 8 14:16:28 2013 From: bobkiss at caribsurf.com (BOB KISS) Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2013 10:16:28 -0400 Subject: [Alt-photo] GALLERIES IN CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA Message-ID: DEAR LIST, This is only tangentially ?on topic? because it concerns moving my show of 20X24 platinum-palladium prints from Charleston SC to Charlotte NC. Does anyone know of good photo galleries in Charlotte, North Carolina? CHEERS! BOB Please check my website: http://www.bobkiss.com/ "Live as if you are going to die tomorrow. Learn as if you are going to live forever". Mahatma Gandhi "Earth" without "art" is just "Eh"! (Anonymous graffiti posted on Facebook) ?Madonne e fiori, trionfo eterno di giovent?!? from Mattinata Fiorentina by Antonella Ruggiero __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 8887 (20131007) __________ The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. http://www.eset.com From christinazanderson at gmail.com Tue Oct 8 14:22:17 2013 From: christinazanderson at gmail.com (Christina Anderson) Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2013 08:22:17 -0600 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: Ernest Theisen In-Reply-To: References: <9129CC66-E9DF-48C4-A41F-377593F06849@gmail.com> Message-ID: Thanks Jacques, just sent him a FB message, we'll see if that works. Chris Christina Z. Anderson http://christinaZanderson.com/ On Oct 7, 2013, at 2:18 AM, Jacques Kevers wrote: > Christina, > Haven't heard from him since quite a long time. > He lives in Hawai now. > You can find him (and message) on Facebook. > https://www.facebook.com/ernest.theisen?fref=ts > > Best, > Jacques > > > 2013/10/6 Christina Anderson > >> Does anyone know if Ernest Theisen is on this list or still around? I have >> tried to contact him through his website and unblinkingeye to no avail. >> Chris >> >> Christina Z. Anderson >> http://christinaZanderson.com/ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org >> > _______________________________________________ > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org From dlhbloomfield at gmail.com Tue Oct 8 14:24:52 2013 From: dlhbloomfield at gmail.com (Diana Bloomfield) Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2013 10:24:52 -0400 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: GALLERIES IN CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4A66B6E6-8DC4-4110-99C0-295252996F7B@gmail.com> Hey Bob, Check out the Light Factory in Charlotte, and also Taylor-Hodges Gallery. I'm on my way out the door, but if you Google them, you'll find them. The Light Factory would be much better, I think (more inclusive, including workshops, lectures, presentations, etc) is all about photography. Taylor-Hodges is a very nice gallery, but unsure how receptive they are to showing work by artists they don't represent. ?? And, then there are all the oil on canvas people you have to deal with there, too. ;) Diana On Oct 8, 2013, at 10:16 AM, BOB KISS wrote: > DEAR LIST, > > This is only tangentially ?on topic? because it concerns moving > my show of 20X24 platinum-palladium prints from Charleston SC to Charlotte > NC. Does anyone know of good photo galleries in Charlotte, North Carolina? > > > CHEERS! > > BOB > > > > Please check my website: http://www.bobkiss.com/ > > > > > "Live as if you are going to die tomorrow. Learn as if you are going to > live forever". Mahatma Gandhi > > > > "Earth" without "art" is just "Eh"! (Anonymous graffiti posted on Facebook) > > > > ?Madonne e fiori, trionfo eterno di giovent?!? from Mattinata Fiorentina by > Antonella Ruggiero > > > > > > > > __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature > database 8887 (20131007) __________ > > The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. > > http://www.eset.com > > _______________________________________________ > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org From clay at clayharmon.com Tue Oct 8 14:27:48 2013 From: clay at clayharmon.com (clay harmon's personal website email account) Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2013 10:27:48 -0400 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: GALLERIES IN CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA In-Reply-To: <4A66B6E6-8DC4-4110-99C0-295252996F7B@gmail.com> References: <4A66B6E6-8DC4-4110-99C0-295252996F7B@gmail.com> Message-ID: <98DDDFC8-F05C-48B5-AE38-403EF758A7F5@clayharmon.com> Diana, I was going to suggest the Light Factory also, but when I googled their website so I could paste it in my message, I discovered that they are closing as of yesterday!! That is really too bad. I had Laurie Schorr, who was part of the staff at the Light Factory in my polymer photogravure class at Penland back in July, and she did some really great work in the class. Bummer. Clay On Oct 8, 2013, at 10:24 AM, Diana Bloomfield wrote: > Hey Bob, > > Check out the Light Factory in Charlotte, and also Taylor-Hodges Gallery. I'm on my way out the door, but if you Google them, you'll find them. The Light Factory would be much better, I think (more inclusive, including workshops, lectures, presentations, etc) is all about photography. Taylor-Hodges is a very nice gallery, but unsure how receptive they are to showing work by artists they don't represent. ?? And, then there are all the oil on canvas people you have to deal with there, too. ;) > > Diana > > On Oct 8, 2013, at 10:16 AM, BOB KISS wrote: > >> DEAR LIST, >> >> This is only tangentially ?on topic? because it concerns moving >> my show of 20X24 platinum-palladium prints from Charleston SC to Charlotte >> NC. Does anyone know of good photo galleries in Charlotte, North Carolina? >> >> >> CHEERS! >> >> BOB >> >> >> >> Please check my website: http://www.bobkiss.com/ >> >> >> >> >> "Live as if you are going to die tomorrow. Learn as if you are going to >> live forever". Mahatma Gandhi >> >> >> >> "Earth" without "art" is just "Eh"! (Anonymous graffiti posted on Facebook) >> >> >> >> ?Madonne e fiori, trionfo eterno di giovent?!? from Mattinata Fiorentina by >> Antonella Ruggiero >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature >> database 8887 (20131007) __________ >> >> The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. >> >> http://www.eset.com >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > > _______________________________________________ > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org From dlhbloomfield at gmail.com Tue Oct 8 16:08:19 2013 From: dlhbloomfield at gmail.com (Diana Bloomfield) Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2013 12:08:19 -0400 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: GALLERIES IN CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA In-Reply-To: <98DDDFC8-F05C-48B5-AE38-403EF758A7F5@clayharmon.com> References: <4A66B6E6-8DC4-4110-99C0-295252996F7B@gmail.com> <98DDDFC8-F05C-48B5-AE38-403EF758A7F5@clayharmon.com> Message-ID: <6BC3E6B1-F073-4CB5-B1A6-01FC955F5E18@gmail.com> Oh wow-- thanks for that information, Clay. I had no idea. That's amazing. Over at least the last decade or so, I think they've had some issues with turnover and direction (always a new director it seemed)-- but wow-- I'm really stunned by that. "Suspending operations" it says. The Light Factory has been there forever-- And, this for Bob-- I hadn't been to Hodges-Taylor in a while, but when I looked them up just now-- it seems that they *may* not have a physical gallery space anymore-- looks like it's now an "art consultancy." I can't tell if they have 4 walls anymore or not. So . . in answer to your question-- No, there is no place in Charlotte for photography. ;) Diana On Oct 8, 2013, at 10:27 AM, clay harmon's personal website email account wrote: > Diana, > > I was going to suggest the Light Factory also, but when I googled their website so I could paste it in my message, I discovered that they are closing as of yesterday!! > > That is really too bad. I had Laurie Schorr, who was part of the staff at the Light Factory in my polymer photogravure class at Penland back in July, and she did some really great work in the class. > > Bummer. > > Clay From bobkiss at caribsurf.com Tue Oct 8 20:52:49 2013 From: bobkiss at caribsurf.com (BOB KISS) Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2013 16:52:49 -0400 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: GALLERIES IN CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA In-Reply-To: <6BC3E6B1-F073-4CB5-B1A6-01FC955F5E18@gmail.com> References: <4A66B6E6-8DC4-4110-99C0-295252996F7B@gmail.com> <98DDDFC8-F05C-48B5-AE38-403EF758A7F5@clayharmon.com> <6BC3E6B1-F073-4CB5-B1A6-01FC955F5E18@gmail.com> Message-ID: DEAR DIANA & CLAY, Sad news but thanks for the info. Hmmm, it will be difficult to research this from here. There must be SOME gallery that shows fine art photography in a city 5 times the size of Charleston. CHEERS! BOB _____ From: alt-photo-process-list-bounces at lists.altphotolist.org [mailto:alt-photo-process-list-bounces at lists.altphotolist.org] On Behalf Of Diana Bloomfield Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2013 12:08 PM To: alt-photo-process-list at lists.altphotolist.org Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: GALLERIES IN CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA Oh wow-- thanks for that information, Clay. I had no idea. That's amazing. Over at least the last decade or so, I think they've had some issues with turnover and direction (always a new director it seemed)-- but wow-- I'm really stunned by that. "Suspending operations" it says. The Light Factory has been there forever-- And, this for Bob-- I hadn't been to Hodges-Taylor in a while, but when I looked them up just now-- it seems that they *may* not have a physical gallery space anymore-- looks like it's now an "art consultancy." I can't tell if they have 4 walls anymore or not. So . . in answer to your question-- No, there is no place in Charlotte for photography. ;) Diana On Oct 8, 2013, at 10:27 AM, clay harmon's personal website email account wrote: > Diana, > > I was going to suggest the Light Factory also, but when I googled their website so I could paste it in my message, I discovered that they are closing as of yesterday!! > > That is really too bad. I had Laurie Schorr, who was part of the staff at the Light Factory in my polymer photogravure class at Penland back in July, and she did some really great work in the class. > > Bummer. > > Clay _______________________________________________ Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 8892 (20131008) __________ The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. http://www.eset.com __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 8892 (20131008) __________ The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. http://www.eset.com From dlhbloomfield at gmail.com Tue Oct 8 22:10:23 2013 From: dlhbloomfield at gmail.com (Diana Bloomfield) Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2013 18:10:23 -0400 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: GALLERIES IN CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA In-Reply-To: References: <4A66B6E6-8DC4-4110-99C0-295252996F7B@gmail.com> <98DDDFC8-F05C-48B5-AE38-403EF758A7F5@clayharmon.com> <6BC3E6B1-F073-4CB5-B1A6-01FC955F5E18@gmail.com> Message-ID: Hey Bob, Here's a short list of places I know-- but as with most places in the Southeast, I think photography is (has always been) a very hard sell. I can see University galleries really wanting to show your recent work, too, though that's not a commercial ($$$) venue. But hope these help. SECCA, in Winston Salem NC: http://secca.org/ They're connected with the State( of NC) now-- so not exactly sure how they run things anymore. Green Hill Center for NC Art, in Greensboro NC: http://www.greenhillnc.org/ The name is misleading-- they do show works that are not just by or about NC artists/art-- and the curator is very accessible. It's a very nice venue, and they do sell work. Mint Museum in Charlotte: http://www.mintmuseum.org/visit (Out of my league, but you seem interested in Charlotte-- so there it is.) Cameron Art Museum, Wilmington NC: http://www.cameronartmuseum.com/ Asheville Art Museum (for a Museum, they are very accessible): http://www.ashevilleart.org/ Center for Documentary Studies, Duke University: http://documentarystudies.duke.edu/about (I *think* they've changed their policy on unsolicited exhibit proposals-- but you'd have check the website-- I'm not sure). NC State University Gregg Museum in Raleigh NC: http://www.ncsu.edu/gregg/ The director there (Roger Manley) is/was a photographer and film-maker, and they have an outstanding photography collection. They just moved into the NCSU Chancellor's old house-- so it's a gorgeous venue. I can imagine they would be interested in this work. East Carolina University Gray Gallery, in Greenville, NC: The director, Tom Braswell, is a fine photographer himself and a very nice man-- knowledgable and accessible. Again, I do not know how far in advance (nor how) the exhibits are chosen-- but it would be an excellent place to show your work: http://www.ecu.edu/cs-cfac/soad/graygallery/index.cfm That's all I have for you at the moment. I think these places probably have schedules that are booked into 2014, at least-- but it doesn't hurt to contact them. Again, given the nature of the work, I think University galleries are very good options-- and especially because of the nature of the work- -Diana On Oct 8, 2013, at 4:52 PM, BOB KISS wrote: > DEAR DIANA & CLAY, > > Sad news but thanks for the info. Hmmm, it will be difficult to > research this from here. There must be SOME gallery that shows fine art > photography in a city 5 times the size of Charleston. > > CHEERS! > > BOB > > From bobkiss at caribsurf.com Tue Oct 8 22:18:41 2013 From: bobkiss at caribsurf.com (BOB KISS) Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2013 18:18:41 -0400 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: GALLERIES IN CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA In-Reply-To: References: <4A66B6E6-8DC4-4110-99C0-295252996F7B@gmail.com> <98DDDFC8-F05C-48B5-AE38-403EF758A7F5@clayharmon.com> <6BC3E6B1-F073-4CB5-B1A6-01FC955F5E18@gmail.com> Message-ID: DEAR DIANA, Wow, that's a great list! Thanks! I will have to look into each of them and discuss them with the board of the Carolinas and Barbados Legacy Foundation who is behind all of this. Thanks so much! CHEERS! BOB _____ From: alt-photo-process-list-bounces at lists.altphotolist.org [mailto:alt-photo-process-list-bounces at lists.altphotolist.org] On Behalf Of Diana Bloomfield Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2013 6:10 PM To: alt-photo-process-list at lists.altphotolist.org Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: GALLERIES IN CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA Hey Bob, Here's a short list of places I know-- but as with most places in the Southeast, I think photography is (has always been) a very hard sell. I can see University galleries really wanting to show your recent work, too, though that's not a commercial ($$$) venue. But hope these help. SECCA, in Winston Salem NC: http://secca.org/ They're connected with the State( of NC) now-- so not exactly sure how they run things anymore. Green Hill Center for NC Art, in Greensboro NC: http://www.greenhillnc.org/ The name is misleading-- they do show works that are not just by or about NC artists/art-- and the curator is very accessible. It's a very nice venue, and they do sell work. Mint Museum in Charlotte: http://www.mintmuseum.org/visit (Out of my league, but you seem interested in Charlotte-- so there it is.) Cameron Art Museum, Wilmington NC: http://www.cameronartmuseum.com/ Asheville Art Museum (for a Museum, they are very accessible): http://www.ashevilleart.org/ Center for Documentary Studies, Duke University: http://documentarystudies.duke.edu/about (I *think* they've changed their policy on unsolicited exhibit proposals-- but you'd have check the website-- I'm not sure). NC State University Gregg Museum in Raleigh NC: http://www.ncsu.edu/gregg/ The director there (Roger Manley) is/was a photographer and film-maker, and they have an outstanding photography collection. They just moved into the NCSU Chancellor's old house-- so it's a gorgeous venue. I can imagine they would be interested in this work. East Carolina University Gray Gallery, in Greenville, NC: The director, Tom Braswell, is a fine photographer himself and a very nice man-- knowledgable and accessible. Again, I do not know how far in advance (nor how) the exhibits are chosen-- but it would be an excellent place to show your work: http://www.ecu.edu/cs-cfac/soad/graygallery/index.cfm That's all I have for you at the moment. I think these places probably have schedules that are booked into 2014, at least-- but it doesn't hurt to contact them. Again, given the nature of the work, I think University galleries are very good options-- and especially because of the nature of the work- -Diana On Oct 8, 2013, at 4:52 PM, BOB KISS wrote: > DEAR DIANA & CLAY, > > Sad news but thanks for the info. Hmmm, it will be difficult to > research this from here. There must be SOME gallery that shows fine art > photography in a city 5 times the size of Charleston. > > CHEERS! > > BOB > > _______________________________________________ Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 8892 (20131008) __________ The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. http://www.eset.com __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 8892 (20131008) __________ The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. http://www.eset.com From clay at clayharmon.com Tue Oct 8 23:27:05 2013 From: clay at clayharmon.com (clay harmon's personal website email account) Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2013 19:27:05 -0400 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: GALLERIES IN CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA In-Reply-To: References: <4A66B6E6-8DC4-4110-99C0-295252996F7B@gmail.com> <98DDDFC8-F05C-48B5-AE38-403EF758A7F5@clayharmon.com> <6BC3E6B1-F073-4CB5-B1A6-01FC955F5E18@gmail.com> Message-ID: I'll throw in some other possibilities in Asheville: Castell Gallery : [ http://www.castellphotographygallery.com ] is a commercial gallery that has very nice space just a block or so away from the Asheville Art Museum Asheville Bookworks : [ http://www.ashevillebookworks.com ] has recently expanded to include printed work in addition to the book orientation it has had for years. I don't know what the lead time is on their shows, but there is currently a nice exhibition showcasing various types of printing. Clay On Oct 8, 2013, at 6:10 PM, Diana Bloomfield wrote: > Hey Bob, > > Here's a short list of places I know-- but as with most places in the Southeast, I think photography is (has always been) a very hard sell. I can see University galleries really wanting to show your recent work, too, though that's not a commercial ($$$) venue. But hope these help. > > SECCA, in Winston Salem NC: http://secca.org/ They're connected with the State( of NC) now-- so not exactly sure how they run things anymore. > Green Hill Center for NC Art, in Greensboro NC: http://www.greenhillnc.org/ The name is misleading-- they do show works that are not just by or about NC artists/art-- and the curator is very accessible. It's a very nice venue, and they do sell work. > Mint Museum in Charlotte: http://www.mintmuseum.org/visit (Out of my league, but you seem interested in Charlotte-- so there it is.) > Cameron Art Museum, Wilmington NC: http://www.cameronartmuseum.com/ > Asheville Art Museum (for a Museum, they are very accessible): http://www.ashevilleart.org/ > Center for Documentary Studies, Duke University: http://documentarystudies.duke.edu/about (I *think* they've changed their policy on unsolicited exhibit proposals-- but you'd have check the website-- I'm not sure). > NC State University Gregg Museum in Raleigh NC: http://www.ncsu.edu/gregg/ The director there (Roger Manley) is/was a photographer and film-maker, and they have an outstanding photography collection. They just moved into the NCSU Chancellor's old house-- so it's a gorgeous venue. I can imagine they would be interested in this work. > East Carolina University Gray Gallery, in Greenville, NC: The director, Tom Braswell, is a fine photographer himself and a very nice man-- knowledgable and accessible. Again, I do not know how far in advance (nor how) the exhibits are chosen-- but it would be an excellent place to show your work: http://www.ecu.edu/cs-cfac/soad/graygallery/index.cfm > > That's all I have for you at the moment. I think these places probably have schedules that are booked into 2014, at least-- but it doesn't hurt to contact them. Again, given the nature of the work, I think University galleries are very good options-- and especially because of the nature of the work- > > -Diana > > > > > > > On Oct 8, 2013, at 4:52 PM, BOB KISS wrote: > >> DEAR DIANA & CLAY, >> >> Sad news but thanks for the info. Hmmm, it will be difficult to >> research this from here. There must be SOME gallery that shows fine art >> photography in a city 5 times the size of Charleston. >> >> CHEERS! >> >> BOB >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org From clay at clayharmon.com Tue Oct 8 23:30:18 2013 From: clay at clayharmon.com (clay harmon's personal website email account) Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2013 19:30:18 -0400 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: GALLERIES IN CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA In-Reply-To: References: <4A66B6E6-8DC4-4110-99C0-295252996F7B@gmail.com> <98DDDFC8-F05C-48B5-AE38-403EF758A7F5@clayharmon.com> <6BC3E6B1-F073-4CB5-B1A6-01FC955F5E18@gmail.com> Message-ID: Oh, and Highsmith Gallery at UNC-Asheville is a nice exhibition space also. I was in a show there about a year ago. The contact person would probably be Eric Tomberlin. Clay On Oct 8, 2013, at 6:10 PM, Diana Bloomfield wrote: > Hey Bob, > > Here's a short list of places I know-- but as with most places in the Southeast, I think photography is (has always been) a very hard sell. I can see University galleries really wanting to show your recent work, too, though that's not a commercial ($$$) venue. But hope these help. > > SECCA, in Winston Salem NC: http://secca.org/ They're connected with the State( of NC) now-- so not exactly sure how they run things anymore. > Green Hill Center for NC Art, in Greensboro NC: http://www.greenhillnc.org/ The name is misleading-- they do show works that are not just by or about NC artists/art-- and the curator is very accessible. It's a very nice venue, and they do sell work. > Mint Museum in Charlotte: http://www.mintmuseum.org/visit (Out of my league, but you seem interested in Charlotte-- so there it is.) > Cameron Art Museum, Wilmington NC: http://www.cameronartmuseum.com/ > Asheville Art Museum (for a Museum, they are very accessible): http://www.ashevilleart.org/ > Center for Documentary Studies, Duke University: http://documentarystudies.duke.edu/about (I *think* they've changed their policy on unsolicited exhibit proposals-- but you'd have check the website-- I'm not sure). > NC State University Gregg Museum in Raleigh NC: http://www.ncsu.edu/gregg/ The director there (Roger Manley) is/was a photographer and film-maker, and they have an outstanding photography collection. They just moved into the NCSU Chancellor's old house-- so it's a gorgeous venue. I can imagine they would be interested in this work. > East Carolina University Gray Gallery, in Greenville, NC: The director, Tom Braswell, is a fine photographer himself and a very nice man-- knowledgable and accessible. Again, I do not know how far in advance (nor how) the exhibits are chosen-- but it would be an excellent place to show your work: http://www.ecu.edu/cs-cfac/soad/graygallery/index.cfm > > That's all I have for you at the moment. I think these places probably have schedules that are booked into 2014, at least-- but it doesn't hurt to contact them. Again, given the nature of the work, I think University galleries are very good options-- and especially because of the nature of the work- > > -Diana > > > > > > > On Oct 8, 2013, at 4:52 PM, BOB KISS wrote: > >> DEAR DIANA & CLAY, >> >> Sad news but thanks for the info. Hmmm, it will be difficult to >> research this from here. There must be SOME gallery that shows fine art >> photography in a city 5 times the size of Charleston. >> >> CHEERS! >> >> BOB >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org From tim at timothymccoyphoto.com Fri Oct 11 18:59:45 2013 From: tim at timothymccoyphoto.com (Tim McCoy) Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2013 14:59:45 -0400 Subject: [Alt-photo] Exhibition during Atlanta Celebrates Photography Message-ID: If anyone is going to be in Atlanta during October's Atlanta Celebrates Photography festival, an exhibition of 34 of my 16 x 20 palladium- on-translucent-vellum prints from my portfolio, Sanctuary, can be seen at the Douglasville Cultural Arts Center, 8652 Campbellton St., Douglasville, GA 30134, 770/ 949-2787, M-T 9 a.m.-5 p.m., www.artsdouglas.org, through October 25, 2013. Douglasville is about 20 miles east of downtown Atlanta, exit 36 off I-20. Tim McCoy From bobkiss at caribsurf.com Sat Oct 12 10:16:05 2013 From: bobkiss at caribsurf.com (bobkiss @caribsurf.com) Date: Sat, 12 Oct 2013 06:16:05 -0400 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: Exhibition during Atlanta Celebrates Photography In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: DEAR TIM, Congrats on your show! 34 prints is a LOT of printing work! CHEERS! BOB On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 2:59 PM, Tim McCoy wrote: > If anyone is going to be in Atlanta during October's Atlanta Celebrates > Photography festival, an exhibition of 34 of my 16 x 20 palladium- > on-translucent-vellum prints from my portfolio, Sanctuary, can be seen at > the Douglasville Cultural Arts Center, 8652 Campbellton St., Douglasville, > GA 30134, 770/ 949-2787, M-T 9 a.m.-5 p.m., www.artsdouglas.org, through > October 25, 2013. Douglasville is about 20 miles east of downtown Atlanta, > exit 36 off I-20. > > Tim McCoy > > _______________________________________________ > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > From christinazanderson at gmail.com Sun Oct 13 16:21:17 2013 From: christinazanderson at gmail.com (Christina Anderson) Date: Sun, 13 Oct 2013 10:21:17 -0600 Subject: [Alt-photo] lith printing anomaly Message-ID: <231C02BD-55CC-45D7-AC7D-FFA622E2E8BE@gmail.com> Dear All, I posted a couple images on my website of a lith phenomenon I have never seen before. Anyone else experience this and figure it out? Fotospeed Lith Developer Papers are Arista, Ilford MGIV, Ilford Warmtone, the middle one not suitable at all for lith but the students used it. Tim Rudman thinks it could be erratic local development in the first stage with cause unknown. He has not seen it much and suggests a controlled test of it. This is the benefit of teaching. I never get bored seeing student work because after thousands and thousands of images to grade no two are alike. And I never get bored of teaching because there is always something to learn and something to stump you. But the poor students were pretty disappointed.. I hope lith is not another process to go by the wayside like Polaroid, Infrared, etc :( The former great papers are just not there anymore. Chris http://christinaanderson.visualserver.com/Text_page.cfm?pID=1953 Christina Z. Anderson http://christinaZanderson.com/ From rs at silvergrain.org Mon Oct 14 06:45:19 2013 From: rs at silvergrain.org (Ryuji Suzuki) Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2013 02:45:19 -0400 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: lith printing anomaly In-Reply-To: <231C02BD-55CC-45D7-AC7D-FFA622E2E8BE@gmail.com> References: <231C02BD-55CC-45D7-AC7D-FFA622E2E8BE@gmail.com> Message-ID: <525B92FF.9070902@silvergrain.org> I might be asking the obvious, but 1. does the neg print normally on the same paper stock when developed in a regular print developer? 2. what was the agitation technique? 3. what's the dimension of the print (or better yet the approximate diameter range of the white spots?) 4. do you see any sign of the spots in the dark area? Although irrelevant to your problem, I'm curious. What is the second image (below)? -- Ryuji Suzuki "Don't play what's there, play what's not there." (Miles Davis) Christina Anderson wrote: > Dear All, > I posted a couple images on my website of a lith phenomenon I have never seen before. Anyone else experience this and figure it out? > > Fotospeed Lith Developer > Papers are Arista, Ilford MGIV, Ilford Warmtone, the middle one not suitable at all for lith but the students used it. > > Tim Rudman thinks it could be erratic local development in the first stage with cause unknown. He has not seen it much and suggests a controlled test of it. > > This is the benefit of teaching. I never get bored seeing student work because after thousands and thousands of images to grade no two are alike. And I never get bored of teaching because there is always something to learn and something to stump you. But the poor students were pretty disappointed.. > > I hope lith is not another process to go by the wayside like Polaroid, Infrared, etc :( The former great papers are just not there anymore. > Chris > > > http://christinaanderson.visualserver.com/Text_page.cfm?pID=1953 > > > Christina Z. Anderson > http://christinaZanderson.com/ > > _______________________________________________ > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org From christinazanderson at gmail.com Mon Oct 14 13:59:18 2013 From: christinazanderson at gmail.com (Christina Anderson) Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2013 07:59:18 -0600 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: lith printing anomaly In-Reply-To: <525B92FF.9070902@silvergrain.org> References: <231C02BD-55CC-45D7-AC7D-FFA622E2E8BE@gmail.com> <525B92FF.9070902@silvergrain.org> Message-ID: Hi Ryuji! The negative prints normally. The agitation technique was to pick up a corner of the tray and set it down and do it frequently and in an irregular way to avoid the wave effect that sometimes happens with lith. Lith development times were 10-20 minutes. The top print was 16x20 the bottom print was 8x10. Spots are in lights and darks. Second image is a woman standing with blonde hair. This phenomenon happened with a number of students during the lab but not all. On a number of papers. And the second day it also occurred. The second day the student said the first two prints were fine, the third spotted. It is the weirdest thing I have ever seen. The only consistency is the Fotospeed Lith developer and perhaps the papers are all Arista and Ilford....there was one print from expired paper like Bergger that worked fine but so did all the papers at some point! Chris Christina Z. Anderson http://christinaZanderson.com/ On Oct 14, 2013, at 12:45 AM, Ryuji Suzuki wrote: > I might be asking the obvious, but > > 1. does the neg print normally on the same paper stock when developed in a regular print developer? > > 2. what was the agitation technique? > > 3. what's the dimension of the print (or better yet the approximate diameter range of the white spots?) > > 4. do you see any sign of the spots in the dark area? > > Although irrelevant to your problem, I'm curious. What is the second image (below)? > > -- > Ryuji Suzuki > "Don't play what's there, play what's not there." (Miles Davis) > > > > > Christina Anderson wrote: >> Dear All, >> I posted a couple images on my website of a lith phenomenon I have never seen before. Anyone else experience this and figure it out? >> >> Fotospeed Lith Developer >> Papers are Arista, Ilford MGIV, Ilford Warmtone, the middle one not suitable at all for lith but the students used it. >> >> Tim Rudman thinks it could be erratic local development in the first stage with cause unknown. He has not seen it much and suggests a controlled test of it. >> >> This is the benefit of teaching. I never get bored seeing student work because after thousands and thousands of images to grade no two are alike. And I never get bored of teaching because there is always something to learn and something to stump you. But the poor students were pretty disappointed.. >> >> I hope lith is not another process to go by the wayside like Polaroid, Infrared, etc :( The former great papers are just not there anymore. >> Chris >> >> >> http://christinaanderson.visualserver.com/Text_page.cfm?pID=1953 >> >> >> Christina Z. Anderson >> http://christinaZanderson.com/ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > _______________________________________________ > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org From photodigitbc at free.fr Mon Oct 14 14:12:50 2013 From: photodigitbc at free.fr (Bernard) Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2013 16:12:50 +0200 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: lith printing anomaly In-Reply-To: <231C02BD-55CC-45D7-AC7D-FFA622E2E8BE@gmail.com> References: <231C02BD-55CC-45D7-AC7D-FFA622E2E8BE@gmail.com> Message-ID: <525BFBE2.6050806@free.fr> Hi I have processed with lith (Moersch SE5) several times a week for the last year but I've never seen this kind of spot. There is probably a chemical reaction around a "seed", but I dont know what kind. On 13/10/2013 18:21, Christina Anderson wrote: > I hope lith is not another process to go by the wayside like Polaroid, Infrared, etc:( The former great papers are just not there anymore. > Chris I use Slavich papers wtih nice results, they are old fashioned russian papers and react very well to lith. Best, Bernard -- ____________________________________ Galerie: www.pbase.com/photodigitbc From kmorris at stouffer.net Mon Oct 14 14:21:09 2013 From: kmorris at stouffer.net (Kevin Morris) Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2013 10:21:09 -0400 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: lith printing anomaly In-Reply-To: References: <231C02BD-55CC-45D7-AC7D-FFA622E2E8BE@gmail.com> <525B92FF.9070902@silvergrain.org> Message-ID: <00f801cec8e8$a1a33a40$e4e9aec0$@stouffer.net> Hi Christina, What makes this hard to track down is how random is appears to be. I've seen similar spots on film occasionally and the closest we can figure is that they are a small cluster of silver in the emulsion that didn't smooth out properly during the coating process. But, that only happens on one sheet in maybe 800-1000 sheets of 8x10 film and that is only one spot (silver cluster). I've never seen it with paper, Ilford or Arista. One question though. Are these prints being contact printed, maybe with a vacuum board? Sincerely, Kevin Morris Stouffer Industries -----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 Christina Anderson Sent: Monday, October 14, 2013 9:59 AM To: alt-photo-process-list at lists.altphotolist.org Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: lith printing anomaly Hi Ryuji! The negative prints normally. The agitation technique was to pick up a corner of the tray and set it down and do it frequently and in an irregular way to avoid the wave effect that sometimes happens with lith. Lith development times were 10-20 minutes. The top print was 16x20 the bottom print was 8x10. Spots are in lights and darks. Second image is a woman standing with blonde hair. This phenomenon happened with a number of students during the lab but not all. On a number of papers. And the second day it also occurred. The second day the student said the first two prints were fine, the third spotted. It is the weirdest thing I have ever seen. The only consistency is the Fotospeed Lith developer and perhaps the papers are all Arista and Ilford....there was one print from expired paper like Bergger that worked fine but so did all the papers at some point! Chris Christina Z. Anderson http://christinaZanderson.com/ On Oct 14, 2013, at 12:45 AM, Ryuji Suzuki wrote: > I might be asking the obvious, but > > 1. does the neg print normally on the same paper stock when developed in a regular print developer? > > 2. what was the agitation technique? > > 3. what's the dimension of the print (or better yet the approximate diameter range of the white spots?) > > 4. do you see any sign of the spots in the dark area? > > Although irrelevant to your problem, I'm curious. What is the second image (below)? > > -- > Ryuji Suzuki > "Don't play what's there, play what's not there." (Miles Davis) > > > > > Christina Anderson wrote: >> Dear All, >> I posted a couple images on my website of a lith phenomenon I have never seen before. Anyone else experience this and figure it out? >> >> Fotospeed Lith Developer >> Papers are Arista, Ilford MGIV, Ilford Warmtone, the middle one not suitable at all for lith but the students used it. >> >> Tim Rudman thinks it could be erratic local development in the first stage with cause unknown. He has not seen it much and suggests a controlled test of it. >> >> This is the benefit of teaching. I never get bored seeing student work because after thousands and thousands of images to grade no two are alike. And I never get bored of teaching because there is always something to learn and something to stump you. But the poor students were pretty disappointed.. >> >> I hope lith is not another process to go by the wayside like Polaroid, Infrared, etc :( The former great papers are just not there anymore. >> Chris >> >> >> http://christinaanderson.visualserver.com/Text_page.cfm?pID=1953 >> >> >> Christina Z. Anderson >> http://christinaZanderson.com/ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > _______________________________________________ > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org _______________________________________________ Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org From christinazanderson at gmail.com Mon Oct 14 14:32:49 2013 From: christinazanderson at gmail.com (Christina Anderson) Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2013 08:32:49 -0600 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: lith printing anomaly In-Reply-To: <525BFBE2.6050806@free.fr> References: <231C02BD-55CC-45D7-AC7D-FFA622E2E8BE@gmail.com> <525BFBE2.6050806@free.fr> Message-ID: Bernard, You are spot on---it looks like there is a "seed" or a crystal in the middle of the spots! Well, not visible, but creating the reaction. Chris Christina Z. Anderson http://christinaZanderson.com/ On Oct 14, 2013, at 8:12 AM, Bernard wrote: > Hi > > I have processed with lith (Moersch SE5) several times a week for the last year but I've never seen this kind of spot. > There is probably a chemical reaction around a "seed", but I dont know what kind. > > > On 13/10/2013 18:21, Christina Anderson wrote: >> I hope lith is not another process to go by the wayside like Polaroid, Infrared, etc:( The former great papers are just not there anymore. >> Chris > > I use Slavich papers wtih nice results, they are old fashioned russian papers and react very well to lith. > > Best, > Bernard > > > -- > ____________________________________ > Galerie: www.pbase.com/photodigitbc > > _______________________________________________ > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org From christinazanderson at gmail.com Mon Oct 14 14:36:40 2013 From: christinazanderson at gmail.com (Christina Anderson) Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2013 08:36:40 -0600 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: lith printing anomaly In-Reply-To: <00f801cec8e8$a1a33a40$e4e9aec0$@stouffer.net> References: <231C02BD-55CC-45D7-AC7D-FFA622E2E8BE@gmail.com> <525B92FF.9070902@silvergrain.org> <00f801cec8e8$a1a33a40$e4e9aec0$@stouffer.net> Message-ID: Hi Kevin, No, enlarger printed for the most part, although last year I started introducing the BW digineg in this Experimental Photography class just in case we have to end up going there permanently with the way of the world. Some students are thrilled and go straight digital with their work, maybe 5 of the 18. Other students think I have defected from analog as they are film all the way. Plus the class is based on Holga and pinhole work (although you can buy a Holga lens for a digital SLR too...). Chris Christina Z. Anderson http://christinaZanderson.com/ On Oct 14, 2013, at 8:21 AM, Kevin Morris wrote: > Hi Christina, > > What makes this hard to track down is how random is appears to be. I've seen > similar spots on film occasionally and the closest we can figure is that > they are a small cluster of silver in the emulsion that didn't smooth out > properly during the coating process. But, that only happens on one sheet in > maybe 800-1000 sheets of 8x10 film and that is only one spot (silver > cluster). I've never seen it with paper, Ilford or Arista. > > One question though. Are these prints being contact printed, maybe with a > vacuum board? > > Sincerely, > > Kevin Morris > Stouffer Industries > > -----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 > Christina Anderson > Sent: Monday, October 14, 2013 9:59 AM > To: alt-photo-process-list at lists.altphotolist.org > Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: lith printing anomaly > > Hi Ryuji! > The negative prints normally. > The agitation technique was to pick up a corner of the tray and set it down > and do it frequently and in an irregular way to avoid the wave effect that > sometimes happens with lith. Lith development times were 10-20 minutes. > The top print was 16x20 the bottom print was 8x10. > Spots are in lights and darks. > Second image is a woman standing with blonde hair. > > This phenomenon happened with a number of students during the lab but not > all. On a number of papers. And the second day it also occurred. The second > day the student said the first two prints were fine, the third spotted. > > It is the weirdest thing I have ever seen. The only consistency is the > Fotospeed Lith developer and perhaps the papers are all Arista and > Ilford....there was one print from expired paper like Bergger that worked > fine but so did all the papers at some point! > Chris > > Christina Z. Anderson > http://christinaZanderson.com/ > > On Oct 14, 2013, at 12:45 AM, Ryuji Suzuki wrote: > >> I might be asking the obvious, but >> >> 1. does the neg print normally on the same paper stock when developed in a > regular print developer? >> >> 2. what was the agitation technique? >> >> 3. what's the dimension of the print (or better yet the approximate > diameter range of the white spots?) >> >> 4. do you see any sign of the spots in the dark area? >> >> Although irrelevant to your problem, I'm curious. What is the second image > (below)? >> >> -- >> Ryuji Suzuki >> "Don't play what's there, play what's not there." (Miles Davis) >> >> >> >> >> Christina Anderson wrote: >>> Dear All, >>> I posted a couple images on my website of a lith phenomenon I have never > seen before. Anyone else experience this and figure it out? >>> >>> Fotospeed Lith Developer >>> Papers are Arista, Ilford MGIV, Ilford Warmtone, the middle one not > suitable at all for lith but the students used it. >>> >>> Tim Rudman thinks it could be erratic local development in the first > stage with cause unknown. He has not seen it much and suggests a controlled > test of it. >>> >>> This is the benefit of teaching. I never get bored seeing student work > because after thousands and thousands of images to grade no two are alike. > And I never get bored of teaching because there is always something to learn > and something to stump you. But the poor students were pretty disappointed.. >>> >>> I hope lith is not another process to go by the wayside like Polaroid, > Infrared, etc :( The former great papers are just not there anymore. >>> Chris >>> >>> >>> http://christinaanderson.visualserver.com/Text_page.cfm?pID=1953 >>> >>> >>> Christina Z. Anderson >>> http://christinaZanderson.com/ >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org >> _______________________________________________ >> Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > > _______________________________________________ > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > > _______________________________________________ > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org From bobkiss at caribsurf.com Mon Oct 14 14:41:33 2013 From: bobkiss at caribsurf.com (BOB KISS) Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2013 10:41:33 -0400 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: lith printing anomaly In-Reply-To: References: <231C02BD-55CC-45D7-AC7D-FFA622E2E8BE@gmail.com> <525B92FF.9070902@silvergrain.org> Message-ID: DEAR CHRISTINA, If you lived in my very humid environment I might say, "At ease, Disease! There's fungus amongus!" If I leave gelatin coated paper in the normal environment (85F, 80% rel hum) during the rainy season I have seen fungus grow on the paper surface that was sometimes visible before processing and, more sinisterly (is that a word???), sometimes only visible after processing. I don't think you have this environmental issue but I just thought I would toss it out there as a possibility. CHEERS! BOB _____ From: alt-photo-process-list-bounces at lists.altphotolist.org [mailto:alt-photo-process-list-bounces at lists.altphotolist.org] On Behalf Of Christina Anderson Sent: Monday, October 14, 2013 9:59 AM To: alt-photo-process-list at lists.altphotolist.org Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: lith printing anomaly Hi Ryuji! The negative prints normally. The agitation technique was to pick up a corner of the tray and set it down and do it frequently and in an irregular way to avoid the wave effect that sometimes happens with lith. Lith development times were 10-20 minutes. The top print was 16x20 the bottom print was 8x10. Spots are in lights and darks. Second image is a woman standing with blonde hair. This phenomenon happened with a number of students during the lab but not all. On a number of papers. And the second day it also occurred. The second day the student said the first two prints were fine, the third spotted. It is the weirdest thing I have ever seen. The only consistency is the Fotospeed Lith developer and perhaps the papers are all Arista and Ilford....there was one print from expired paper like Bergger that worked fine but so did all the papers at some point! Chris Christina Z. Anderson http://christinaZanderson.com/ On Oct 14, 2013, at 12:45 AM, Ryuji Suzuki wrote: > I might be asking the obvious, but > > 1. does the neg print normally on the same paper stock when developed in a regular print developer? > > 2. what was the agitation technique? > > 3. what's the dimension of the print (or better yet the approximate diameter range of the white spots?) > > 4. do you see any sign of the spots in the dark area? > > Although irrelevant to your problem, I'm curious. What is the second image (below)? > > -- > Ryuji Suzuki > "Don't play what's there, play what's not there." (Miles Davis) > > > > > Christina Anderson wrote: >> Dear All, >> I posted a couple images on my website of a lith phenomenon I have never seen before. Anyone else experience this and figure it out? >> >> Fotospeed Lith Developer >> Papers are Arista, Ilford MGIV, Ilford Warmtone, the middle one not suitable at all for lith but the students used it. >> >> Tim Rudman thinks it could be erratic local development in the first stage with cause unknown. He has not seen it much and suggests a controlled test of it. >> >> This is the benefit of teaching. I never get bored seeing student work because after thousands and thousands of images to grade no two are alike. And I never get bored of teaching because there is always something to learn and something to stump you. But the poor students were pretty disappointed.. >> >> I hope lith is not another process to go by the wayside like Polaroid, Infrared, etc :( The former great papers are just not there anymore. >> Chris >> >> >> http://christinaanderson.visualserver.com/Text_page.cfm?pID=1953 >> >> >> Christina Z. Anderson >> http://christinaZanderson.com/ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > _______________________________________________ > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org _______________________________________________ Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 8914 (20131014) __________ The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. http://www.eset.com __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 8915 (20131014) __________ The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. http://www.eset.com From photodigitbc at free.fr Mon Oct 14 14:53:15 2013 From: photodigitbc at free.fr (Bernard) Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2013 16:53:15 +0200 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: lith printing anomaly In-Reply-To: References: <231C02BD-55CC-45D7-AC7D-FFA622E2E8BE@gmail.com> <525BFBE2.6050806@free.fr> Message-ID: <525C055B.3000905@free.fr> I looked at my first experiments with lith and I have one photo with the same kind of spots, less regular maybe: http://www.pbase.com/photodigitbc/image/151679016 This was on a very old (20years+) and very veiled paper, dont know if I can reproduce the same result. I have still got some of that paper. Bernard On 14/10/2013 16:32, Christina Anderson wrote: > Bernard, > You are spot on---it looks like there is a "seed" or a crystal in the middle of the spots! Well, not visible, but creating the reaction. > Chris > Christina Z. Anderson > http://christinaZanderson.com/ > > On Oct 14, 2013, at 8:12 AM, Bernard wrote: > >> Hi >> >> I have processed with lith (Moersch SE5) several times a week for the last year but I've never seen this kind of spot. >> There is probably a chemical reaction around a "seed", but I dont know what kind. >> >> >> On 13/10/2013 18:21, Christina Anderson wrote: >>> I hope lith is not another process to go by the wayside like Polaroid, Infrared, etc:( The former great papers are just not there anymore. >>> Chris >> I use Slavich papers wtih nice results, they are old fashioned russian papers and react very well to lith. >> >> Best, >> Bernard >> >> >> -- >> ____________________________________ >> Galerie: www.pbase.com/photodigitbc >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > _______________________________________________ > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > > -- ____________________________________ Galerie: www.pbase.com/photodigitbc From christinazanderson at gmail.com Mon Oct 14 15:01:48 2013 From: christinazanderson at gmail.com (Christina Anderson) Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2013 09:01:48 -0600 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: lith printing anomaly In-Reply-To: <525C055B.3000905@free.fr> References: <231C02BD-55CC-45D7-AC7D-FFA622E2E8BE@gmail.com> <525BFBE2.6050806@free.fr> <525C055B.3000905@free.fr> Message-ID: <51374D8B-B779-4073-AB56-C0606D47F051@gmail.com> YES. This is it!! What a beautiful print because of those spots though! Chris Christina Z. Anderson http://christinaZanderson.com/ On Oct 14, 2013, at 8:53 AM, Bernard wrote: > > I looked at my first experiments with lith and I have one photo with the same kind of spots, less regular maybe: > http://www.pbase.com/photodigitbc/image/151679016 > > This was on a very old (20years+) and very veiled paper, dont know if I can reproduce the same result. > I have still got some of that paper. > > Bernard > > > > On 14/10/2013 16:32, Christina Anderson wrote: >> Bernard, >> You are spot on---it looks like there is a "seed" or a crystal in the middle of the spots! Well, not visible, but creating the reaction. >> Chris >> Christina Z. Anderson >> http://christinaZanderson.com/ >> >> On Oct 14, 2013, at 8:12 AM, Bernard wrote: >> >>> Hi >>> >>> I have processed with lith (Moersch SE5) several times a week for the last year but I've never seen this kind of spot. >>> There is probably a chemical reaction around a "seed", but I dont know what kind. >>> >>> >>> On 13/10/2013 18:21, Christina Anderson wrote: >>>> I hope lith is not another process to go by the wayside like Polaroid, Infrared, etc:( The former great papers are just not there anymore. >>>> Chris >>> I use Slavich papers wtih nice results, they are old fashioned russian papers and react very well to lith. >>> >>> Best, >>> Bernard >>> >>> >>> -- >>> ____________________________________ >>> Galerie: www.pbase.com/photodigitbc >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org >> _______________________________________________ >> Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org >> >> > > > -- > ____________________________________ > Galerie: www.pbase.com/photodigitbc > > _______________________________________________ > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org From rs at silvergrain.org Tue Oct 15 01:59:24 2013 From: rs at silvergrain.org (Ryuji Suzuki) Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2013 21:59:24 -0400 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: lith printing anomaly In-Reply-To: References: <231C02BD-55CC-45D7-AC7D-FFA622E2E8BE@gmail.com> <525B92FF.9070902@silvergrain.org> Message-ID: <525CA17C.5040309@silvergrain.org> > The second day the student said the first two prints were fine, the third spotted. Might it be related to exhaustion of sulfite and/or hydroquinone in the developer? What if a fresh bath of developer is used for each print? What if the developer is replenished with a fractional amount of fresh stock added each time? I don't recall every bit of strange results, but I did find frustration with unpredictably variable outcome from two successive prints. That's why I formulated a lith print developer that is fully active and well seasoned when freshly mixed, so that it can be used one-shot. I don't really have a explanation for this phenomenon. But one thing I am curious about is whether these flakes are a result of inhibited development or bleached latent image. It'd be curious to take a sample of partially lith developed print with the artifacts and bring it to a fresh bath of regular print developer to continue development. If the latent image is busted you'd expect the flakes to remain undeveloped. -- Ryuji Suzuki "Don't play what's there, play what's not there." (Miles Davis) Christina Anderson wrote: > Hi Ryuji! > The negative prints normally. > The agitation technique was to pick up a corner of the tray and set it down and do it frequently and in an irregular way to avoid the wave effect that sometimes happens with lith. Lith development times were 10-20 minutes. > The top print was 16x20 the bottom print was 8x10. > Spots are in lights and darks. > Second image is a woman standing with blonde hair. > > This phenomenon happened with a number of students during the lab but not all. On a number of papers. And the second day it also occurred. The second day the student said the first two prints were fine, the third spotted. > > It is the weirdest thing I have ever seen. The only consistency is the Fotospeed Lith developer and perhaps the papers are all Arista and Ilford....there was one print from expired paper like Bergger that worked fine but so did all the papers at some point! > Chris > > Christina Z. Anderson > http://christinaZanderson.com/ > > On Oct 14, 2013, at 12:45 AM, Ryuji Suzuki wrote: > >> I might be asking the obvious, but >> >> 1. does the neg print normally on the same paper stock when developed in a regular print developer? >> >> 2. what was the agitation technique? >> >> 3. what's the dimension of the print (or better yet the approximate diameter range of the white spots?) >> >> 4. do you see any sign of the spots in the dark area? >> >> Although irrelevant to your problem, I'm curious. What is the second image (below)? >> >> -- >> Ryuji Suzuki >> "Don't play what's there, play what's not there." (Miles Davis) >> >> >> >> >> Christina Anderson wrote: >>> Dear All, >>> I posted a couple images on my website of a lith phenomenon I have never seen before. Anyone else experience this and figure it out? >>> >>> Fotospeed Lith Developer >>> Papers are Arista, Ilford MGIV, Ilford Warmtone, the middle one not suitable at all for lith but the students used it. >>> >>> Tim Rudman thinks it could be erratic local development in the first stage with cause unknown. He has not seen it much and suggests a controlled test of it. >>> >>> This is the benefit of teaching. I never get bored seeing student work because after thousands and thousands of images to grade no two are alike. And I never get bored of teaching because there is always something to learn and something to stump you. But the poor students were pretty disappointed.. >>> >>> I hope lith is not another process to go by the wayside like Polaroid, Infrared, etc :( The former great papers are just not there anymore. >>> Chris >>> >>> >>> http://christinaanderson.visualserver.com/Text_page.cfm?pID=1953 >>> >>> >>> Christina Z. Anderson >>> http://christinaZanderson.com/ >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org >> _______________________________________________ >> Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > > _______________________________________________ > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org From e.camerling at tiscali.nl Wed Oct 16 12:09:03 2013 From: e.camerling at tiscali.nl (Erich Camerling) Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2013 14:09:03 +0200 Subject: [Alt-photo] 365 nm. UV-Densitometer . Message-ID: <525E81DF.4090603@tiscali.nl> Dear members, In 1981 I developed and built my first visible-light densitometer ( calibrated with Kodak Wratten no.96 neutral density filters) that functioned very well in combination with silver negatives. But in 2007 I had to go across printed colour negatives . And that gave me a lot of problems / troubles ! So I studied the article from Mike Ware :" An investigation of Platinum and Palladium Printing " ( The Journal of Photographic Science. Vol 34. 1986 .page 13 - 25) and red that the maximum sensitivity in alt-photo processes ( like kallitype , argyrotype , VDB and platinotype ) is ~ 315 - 365 nm UV-light .Because I use Philips Cleo Bodycare fluorescent lamps ( 315 - 380 nm , peak 350 nm ) in a light box and found data about Epson R 2400 inks = Ultrachrome K3 ( www.albertonovo.it/scan/epson_inks.html ) with a maximum A ( optical density ( O.D.) ) for black , blue , cyan and green ink in the range between 330 nm and 360 nm. ( O.D. = ~ 3 ) I started a search for a not too expensive densitometer in that range. ( X-rite 361T is measuring at 380 nm for UV ( O.D. for inks = ~ 1.5 - 2.5 ) warm-up time 5 minutes ) and too expensive for me.($ 2850,=) But I couldn't find such a densitometer and then I decided to develop my own UV-densitometer. Waiting for a 340 nm. LED didn't give a serious result , so I bought a Nichia UV-LED : NCSU033B . 365 nm. ~ 325 mW @ 500 mA. Price ( In the Netherlands ) ~ EUR 80.= as a UV light source. For the sensor I bought an EPD-365-0-2.5 GaP-UV-photodiode ( max. sensitivity 360 - 370 nm ) Price EUR 75.= . Then I started developing the electrical circuit. But unfortunately that was much more complicated then building a visible-light densitometer.!! After a lot of attempts who all became a failure I became a little bit desperate.But a good friend of mine would help me.And he did it on an incredible intelligent way. So now I have a perfect working prototype 365 nm. UV-densitometer with a professional quality ( range D = 0,1 - 3.5 with delta D = ? 0.02 . No warm-up time ) for an amateur price: ~EUR 500.= when you-do-it -yourself !!!!! To be continued next week. PS. Because I had lessons in English more than 40 years ago there is a serious possibility that I will make grammatical mistakes. Please correct me (on my personal e-mail address ) and I will improve/rectify/correct the text on internet. From don at sweetlegal.co.nz Fri Oct 18 04:13:22 2013 From: don at sweetlegal.co.nz (Don Sweet) Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2013 17:13:22 +1300 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: 365 nm. UV-Densitometer . References: <525E81DF.4090603@tiscali.nl> Message-ID: <064a01cecbb8$6623db50$0502a8c0@east> Dear Erich Your English is completely clear and your report is very helpful. I am looking forward to part 2. Thanks Don Sweet ----- Original Message ----- From: "Erich Camerling" To: "Alt Photo" Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2013 1:09 AM Subject: [Alt-photo] 365 nm. UV-Densitometer . Dear members, In 1981 I developed and built my first visible-light densitometer ( calibrated with Kodak Wratten no.96 neutral density filters) that functioned very well in combination with silver negatives. But in 2007 I had to go across printed colour negatives . And that gave me a lot of problems / troubles ! So I studied the article from Mike Ware :" An investigation of Platinum and Palladium Printing " ( The Journal of Photographic Science. Vol 34. 1986 .page 13 - 25) and red that the maximum sensitivity in alt-photo processes ( like kallitype , argyrotype , VDB and platinotype ) is ~ 315 - 365 nm UV-light .Because I use Philips Cleo Bodycare fluorescent lamps ( 315 - 380 nm , peak 350 nm ) in a light box and found data about Epson R 2400 inks = Ultrachrome K3 ( www.albertonovo.it/scan/epson_inks.html ) with a maximum A ( optical density ( O.D.) ) for black , blue , cyan and green ink in the range between 330 nm and 360 nm. ( O.D. = ~ 3 ) I started a search for a not too expensive densitometer in that range. ( X-rite 361T is measuring at 380 nm for UV ( O.D. for inks = ~ 1.5 - 2.5 ) warm-up time 5 minutes ) and too expensive for me.($ 2850,=) But I couldn't find such a densitometer and then I decided to develop my own UV-densitometer. Waiting for a 340 nm. LED didn't give a serious result , so I bought a Nichia UV-LED : NCSU033B . 365 nm. ~ 325 mW @ 500 mA. Price ( In the Netherlands ) ~ EUR 80.= as a UV light source. For the sensor I bought an EPD-365-0-2.5 GaP-UV-photodiode ( max. sensitivity 360 - 370 nm ) Price EUR 75.= . Then I started developing the electrical circuit. But unfortunately that was much more complicated then building a visible-light densitometer.!! After a lot of attempts who all became a failure I became a little bit desperate.But a good friend of mine would help me.And he did it on an incredible intelligent way. So now I have a perfect working prototype 365 nm. UV-densitometer with a professional quality ( range D = 0,1 - 3.5 with delta D = ? 0.02 . No warm-up time ) for an amateur price: ~EUR 500.= when you-do-it -yourself !!!!! To be continued next week. PS. Because I had lessons in English more than 40 years ago there is a serious possibility that I will make grammatical mistakes. Please correct me (on my personal e-mail address ) and I will improve/rectify/correct the text on internet. _______________________________________________ Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org From damiano.bianca at gmail.com Sat Oct 19 11:21:13 2013 From: damiano.bianca at gmail.com (Damiano Bianca) Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2013 13:21:13 +0200 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: 365 nm. UV-Densitometer . In-Reply-To: <525E81DF.4090603@tiscali.nl> References: <525E81DF.4090603@tiscali.nl> Message-ID: I'm very interested damiano > ...... > > To be continued next week. > > From laura at lavatop.com Sat Oct 19 12:43:41 2013 From: laura at lavatop.com (Laura V) Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2013 12:43:41 +0000 Subject: [Alt-photo] Back to gum after 4 years' break and terrified!! Message-ID: <52627E7D.30306@lavatop.com> Ok, I'm not really terrified, but it really is a bit like starting over again, trying to remember the process and take the plunge to begin. I'm wondering in particular about my old chemicals...is my pot. dichromate solution still good? Do I need to wear a hazmat suit when opening it in case it explodes?? I have a couple of other questions that I'll put in separate messages by subject. This is mainly just a re-introduction or introduction for those who signed on while I was away. I had gotten as far as producing a few tri-color gums - for example this one: http://lauraval.com/sensual/atticseated.html - with a lot of help from this group! As some of you may recall, I'm up here in an alt-process vacuum (Iceland) so it's really appreciated to be able come here for the occasional reality check and also to see your work. Good to be back! Laura From laura at lavatop.com Sat Oct 19 12:58:15 2013 From: laura at lavatop.com (Laura V) Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2013 12:58:15 +0000 Subject: [Alt-photo] lump gum Message-ID: <526281E7.8030607@lavatop.com> Previously, I had used pre-mixed gum arabic and also the powdered version which I mixed myself, but then I ran out. The pre-mixed is so expensive to ship, and I couldn't find the powdered stuff online, so I ordered lump gum which I've never used. I can't find any instructions for mixing it, but finally just put some in a plastic container with roughly an equal amount of water. A day later and some of the lumps have melted, but the bigger ones are still there and it's kind of gritty and hairy looking. I suppose I'll just filter out the lumps and gritty stuff - but was I supposed to do anything differently such as heat the water? I was really surprised at how large some of the lumps were - I was expecting something where the lumps were more evenly sized. Has anyone used this stuff? Here's an image: http://lauraval.com/gumlumps.jpg That's a 2-liter sized ice-cream container so those lumps are BIG! Laura From donsbryant at gmail.com Sat Oct 19 13:01:23 2013 From: donsbryant at gmail.com (Don) Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2013 09:01:23 -0400 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: Back to gum after 4 years' break and terrified!! In-Reply-To: <52627E7D.30306@lavatop.com> References: <52627E7D.30306@lavatop.com> Message-ID: <5A12934438D842BBA64524B9EEDE5E24@FireBreather> Laura, > I'm wondering in particular about my old chemicals...is my pot. dichromate solution still good? > Yes. > Do I need to wear a hazmat suit when opening it in case it explodes?? > You probably want to wear a disposable dust mask like the kind made by 3M and available at most any hardware, paint, or home improvement store. > I have a couple of other questions that I'll put in separate messages by subject. This is mainly just a re-introduction or introduction for those who signed on while I was away. I had gotten as far as producing a few tri-color gums - for example this one: http://lauraval.com/sensual/atticseated.html - with a lot of help from this group! As some of you may recall, I'm up here in an alt-process vacuum (Iceland) so it's really appreciated to be able come here for the occasional reality check and also to see your work. Good to be back! > There are so many ways to nirvana with gum and tri-color gum. To restart it maybe easier to start practice again with a single color gum and learn the nuisances of the process to get back in the grove and then move on to tri-color again. Your web examples look pretty good. The big key is that 'Practice make Perfect'. Good luck, Don Bryant Laura _______________________________________________ Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org From laura at lavatop.com Sat Oct 19 13:22:42 2013 From: laura at lavatop.com (Laura V) Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2013 13:22:42 +0000 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: Back to gum after 4 years' break and terrified!! In-Reply-To: <5A12934438D842BBA64524B9EEDE5E24@FireBreather> References: <52627E7D.30306@lavatop.com> <5A12934438D842BBA64524B9EEDE5E24@FireBreather> Message-ID: <526287A2.3020308@lavatop.com> Thanks for the encouragement Don! Yes, small and one color is how I'm planning to start. Laura On 10/19/13 1:01 PM, Don wrote: > Laura, > > I'm > wondering in particular about my old chemicals...is my pot. dichromate > solution still good? > Yes. > > Do I need to wear a hazmat suit when opening it in > case it explodes?? > You probably want to wear a disposable dust mask like the kind made by 3M > and available at most any hardware, paint, or home improvement store. > > I have a couple of other questions that I'll put in separate messages by > subject. This is mainly just a re-introduction or introduction for those > who signed on while I was away. I had gotten as far as producing a few > tri-color gums - for example this one: > http://lauraval.com/sensual/atticseated.html - with a lot of help from > this group! As some of you may recall, I'm up here in an alt-process > vacuum (Iceland) so it's really appreciated to be able come here for the > occasional reality check and also to see your work. > > Good to be back! > There are so many ways to nirvana with gum and tri-color gum. To restart it > maybe easier to start practice again with a single color gum and learn the > nuisances of the process to get back in the grove and then move on to > tri-color again. > > Your web examples look pretty good. The big key is that 'Practice make > Perfect'. > > Good luck, > > Don Bryant > > > > Laura > _______________________________________________ > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > > _______________________________________________ > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > > From donsbryant at gmail.com Sat Oct 19 13:49:47 2013 From: donsbryant at gmail.com (Don) Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2013 09:49:47 -0400 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: lump gum In-Reply-To: <526281E7.8030607@lavatop.com> References: <526281E7.8030607@lavatop.com> Message-ID: <47651C61D98A4B7CAFFA30FA1EFC044F@FireBreather> I've never used lump gum but you could pulverize the dry lump gum in a dry food blender or drink mixer. With persistence the gum lumps should become rather small or powdery. You can then weight a quantity and mix in a blender with distilled water with a touch of thymol. This will make a foamy solution but it is quite usable and the foam condenses rather quickly. I usually let my mix sit over night in a sealed container which allows the mix to become homogeneous. Store in a sealed container and decant as needed for use. There has to be a European source for powdered gum, perhaps our euro members can suggest a good source. Don > Previously, I had used pre-mixed gum arabic and also the powdered version which I mixed myself, but then I ran out. The pre-mixed is so expensive to ship, and I couldn't find the powdered stuff online, so I ordered lump gum which I've never used. > From laura at lavatop.com Sat Oct 19 13:53:35 2013 From: laura at lavatop.com (Laura V) Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2013 13:53:35 +0000 Subject: [Alt-photo] UV lighting Message-ID: <52628EDF.5000608@lavatop.com> I had been using a vacuum light unit (used by plate or screen printers at my local printmakers' studio) for my UV exposures which worked great, but the bulb burned out (and no plans by them to replace). My alternative is one of these: http://www.lamptech.co.uk/Spec%20Sheets/Philips%20HPR125.htm which someone from this list was kind enough to send me a few years back (thanks John if you are still here!). Has anyone used one of these? I'm assuming this will be good for smaller sized prints - the specs say the angle of the reflector is 30?. Would it be possible to move the bulb farther away for a larger size, or somehow use reflective material to increase the area size, or is this bulb just not powerful enough for that? Also, do I need to use a fan with this lamp? I am thinking of putting it inside the printing unit below the vacuum press. If this lamp doesn't work when I decide to go larger, I'm limited to either what's available locally or what I can order on the internet. What's available here are grow lights, fluorescent or mercury halide. My confusion lies in the fact that these are listed in color temperature, whereas recommendations for gum printing are usually given in wavelengths. Is there a correlation between color temperature and wavelength? Is higher color temperature necessarily better (do they produce more UV in the suitable wavelength)? Thanks! Laura From bobkiss at caribsurf.com Sat Oct 19 14:41:47 2013 From: bobkiss at caribsurf.com (BOB KISS) Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2013 10:41:47 -0400 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: UV lighting In-Reply-To: <52628EDF.5000608@lavatop.com> References: <52628EDF.5000608@lavatop.com> Message-ID: DEAR LAURA, Which plate burner were you using at your local printmaker?s studio? Why not make a deal with them where you buy the replacement bulb in return for many, many hours of use of the plate burner? CHEERS! BOB _____ From: alt-photo-process-list-bounces at lists.altphotolist.org [mailto:alt-photo-process-list-bounces at lists.altphotolist.org] On Behalf Of Laura V Sent: Saturday, October 19, 2013 9:54 AM To: alt-photo-process-list at lists.altphotolist.org Subject: [Alt-photo] UV lighting I had been using a vacuum light unit (used by plate or screen printers at my local printmakers' studio) for my UV exposures which worked great, but the bulb burned out (and no plans by them to replace). My alternative is one of these: http://www.lamptech.co.uk/Spec%20Sheets/Philips%20HPR125.htm which someone from this list was kind enough to send me a few years back (thanks John if you are still here!). Has anyone used one of these? I'm assuming this will be good for smaller sized prints - the specs say the angle of the reflector is 30?. Would it be possible to move the bulb farther away for a larger size, or somehow use reflective material to increase the area size, or is this bulb just not powerful enough for that? Also, do I need to use a fan with this lamp? I am thinking of putting it inside the printing unit below the vacuum press. If this lamp doesn't work when I decide to go larger, I'm limited to either what's available locally or what I can order on the internet. What's available here are grow lights, fluorescent or mercury halide. My confusion lies in the fact that these are listed in color temperature, whereas recommendations for gum printing are usually given in wavelengths. Is there a correlation between color temperature and wavelength? Is higher color temperature necessarily better (do they produce more UV in the suitable wavelength)? Thanks! Laura _______________________________________________ Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 8938 (20131019) __________ The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. http://www.eset.com __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 8938 (20131019) __________ The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. http://www.eset.com From workshops at polychrome.nl Sat Oct 19 14:50:56 2013 From: workshops at polychrome.nl (Kees Brandenburg) Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2013 16:50:56 +0200 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: UV lighting In-Reply-To: <52628EDF.5000608@lavatop.com> References: <52628EDF.5000608@lavatop.com> Message-ID: Hi Laura, Philips HPR125 bulbs need a balast (transformator) in the circuit. With one lamp you can expose pretty large prints by adjusting the height. But at some point exposure times gets too long. Compared to a bank of UV fluorescent tubes HPR125 need 2 stops more expores 8 min vs 2 min. in my setup. I use both in my studio and kind of like the HPR, more a point light source and less diffuse, which gives somewhat more punch to a gumprint. By the way, this is my bank of UV TL: http://polychrome.nl/techlog/simple-and-cheap-uv-unit Kees On 19 okt. 2013, at 15:53, Laura V wrote: > I had been using a vacuum light unit (used by plate or screen printers at my local printmakers' studio) for my UV exposures which worked great, but the bulb burned out (and no plans by them to replace). > > My alternative is one of these: http://www.lamptech.co.uk/Spec%20Sheets/Philips%20HPR125.htm > which someone from this list was kind enough to send me a few years back (thanks John if you are still here!). Has anyone used one of these? I'm assuming this will be good for smaller sized prints - the specs say the angle of the reflector is 30?. Would it be possible to move the bulb farther away for a larger size, or somehow use reflective material to increase the area size, or is this bulb just not powerful enough for that? Also, do I need to use a fan with this lamp? I am thinking of putting it inside the printing unit below the vacuum press. > > If this lamp doesn't work when I decide to go larger, I'm limited to either what's available locally or what I can order on the internet. What's available here are grow lights, fluorescent or mercury halide. My confusion lies in the fact that these are listed in color temperature, whereas recommendations for gum printing are usually given in wavelengths. Is there a correlation between color temperature and wavelength? Is higher color temperature necessarily better (do they produce more UV in the suitable wavelength)? From altguido at gmail.com Sat Oct 19 15:01:41 2013 From: altguido at gmail.com (Guido Ceuppens) Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2013 17:01:41 +0200 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: lump gum In-Reply-To: <47651C61D98A4B7CAFFA30FA1EFC044F@FireBreather> References: <526281E7.8030607@lavatop.com> <47651C61D98A4B7CAFFA30FA1EFC044F@FireBreather> Message-ID: Laura, I used the following procedure with lumps of gum: 300 grs of gum are slowly dissolved in 850 ml of cold water, this may take several days. The impurities are then filtered or fished out, some recommend to suspend the lumps of gum in a muslin bag to prevent the impurities to float in the solution. Once dissolved a preservation agent must be added to the solution: in the past I have added either 15 ml of formol or 7.5 grs of sodium benzoate. I have used the thus prepared gum for years without it going bad (I mainly use casein now but occasionally use gum that was prepared from powder ?same procedure- 7 years ago). Welcome back and good luck, Guido ______________________________________________ > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > From workshops at polychrome.nl Sat Oct 19 15:01:53 2013 From: workshops at polychrome.nl (Kees Brandenburg) Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2013 17:01:53 +0200 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: lump gum In-Reply-To: <526281E7.8030607@lavatop.com> References: <526281E7.8030607@lavatop.com> Message-ID: Hi Laura, Most of the time I am using gum in lumps. I disolve these to a 26% solution (by weight) by taking 260 grams and add water to a total of 1000gr. I allways fold the lumps in a peace of cheesecloth, bind it together and hang it in the water in a jar. Time does the rest. Squeeze it after 24 hours (or more). The gritty stuf stays in the cloth! Powdered gum can also be found at kremerpigmente.com. I always get a much clearer gum with the lump/cheescloth method! kees On 19 okt. 2013, at 14:58, Laura V wrote: > Previously, I had used pre-mixed gum arabic and also the powdered version which I mixed myself, but then I ran out. The pre-mixed is so expensive to ship, and I couldn't find the powdered stuff online, so I ordered lump gum which I've never used. I can't find any instructions for mixing it, but finally just put some in a plastic container with roughly an equal amount of water. A day later and some of the lumps have melted, but the bigger ones are still there and it's kind of gritty and hairy looking. I suppose I'll just filter out the lumps and gritty stuff - but was I supposed to do anything differently such as heat the water? > > I was really surprised at how large some of the lumps were - I was expecting something where the lumps were more evenly sized. Has anyone used this stuff? Here's an image: http://lauraval.com/gumlumps.jpg That's a 2-liter sized ice-cream container so those lumps are BIG! From laura at lavatop.com Sat Oct 19 15:12:36 2013 From: laura at lavatop.com (Laura V) Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2013 15:12:36 +0000 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: UV lighting In-Reply-To: References: <52628EDF.5000608@lavatop.com> Message-ID: <5262A164.1050303@lavatop.com> Oh, that's actually not a bad idea! The unit is a Helioprint PD 130. I couldn't really find any info online, but I intend to check the bulb and see if I can find that online. It would be great to continue using the unit, it's so handy having the vacuum press and timer. Heh, I wonder if I'm the one who burned out the bulb in the first place from so much use :) Laura On 10/19/13 2:41 PM, BOB KISS wrote: > DEAR LAURA, > > Which plate burner were you using at your local printmaker?s > studio? Why not make a deal with them where you buy the replacement bulb in > return for many, many hours of use of the plate burner? > > CHEERS! > > BOB > > > > _____ > > From: alt-photo-process-list-bounces at lists.altphotolist.org > [mailto:alt-photo-process-list-bounces at lists.altphotolist.org] On Behalf Of > Laura V > Sent: Saturday, October 19, 2013 9:54 AM > To: alt-photo-process-list at lists.altphotolist.org > Subject: [Alt-photo] UV lighting > > > > I had been using a vacuum light unit (used by plate or screen printers > at my local printmakers' studio) for my UV exposures which worked great, > but the bulb burned out (and no plans by them to replace). > > My alternative is one of these: > http://www.lamptech.co.uk/Spec%20Sheets/Philips%20HPR125.htm > which someone from this list was kind enough to send me a few years back > (thanks John if you are still here!). Has anyone used one of these? I'm > assuming this will be good for smaller sized prints - the specs say the > angle of the reflector is 30?. Would it be possible to move the bulb > farther away for a larger size, or somehow use reflective material to > increase the area size, or is this bulb just not powerful enough for > that? Also, do I need to use a fan with this lamp? I am thinking of > putting it inside the printing unit below the vacuum press. > > If this lamp doesn't work when I decide to go larger, I'm limited to > either what's available locally or what I can order on the internet. > What's available here are grow lights, fluorescent or mercury halide. My > confusion lies in the fact that these are listed in color temperature, > whereas recommendations for gum printing are usually given in > wavelengths. Is there a correlation between color temperature and > wavelength? Is higher color temperature necessarily better (do they > produce more UV in the suitable wavelength)? > > Thanks! > Laura > _______________________________________________ > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > > > > __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature > database 8938 (20131019) __________ > > The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. > > http://www.eset.com > > > > __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature > database 8938 (20131019) __________ > > The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. > > http://www.eset.com > > _______________________________________________ > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > > From laura at lavatop.com Sat Oct 19 15:17:15 2013 From: laura at lavatop.com (Laura V) Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2013 15:17:15 +0000 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: UV lighting In-Reply-To: References: <52628EDF.5000608@lavatop.com> Message-ID: <5262A27B.80603@lavatop.com> Thanks for this info. Good to know that you can go larger - but to be clear, by large I mean A3 size as opposed to A4. I do have a ballast that came with the bulb. About the bank of UV...I notice they are practically touching. Is this because the light needs to be direct and not reflected? (as opposed to for example the grow lights pictured here, which are spaced apart in a relector) http://innigardar.is/index.php?dispatch=products.view&product_id=29845 Laura On 10/19/13 2:50 PM, Kees Brandenburg wrote: > Hi Laura, > > Philips HPR125 bulbs need a balast (transformator) in the circuit. With one lamp you can expose pretty large prints by adjusting the height. But at some point exposure times gets too long. Compared to a bank of UV fluorescent tubes HPR125 need 2 stops more expores 8 min vs 2 min. in my setup. > > I use both in my studio and kind of like the HPR, more a point light source and less diffuse, which gives somewhat more punch to a gumprint. > > By the way, this is my bank of UV TL: http://polychrome.nl/techlog/simple-and-cheap-uv-unit > > Kees > > > On 19 okt. 2013, at 15:53, Laura V wrote: > >> I had been using a vacuum light unit (used by plate or screen printers at my local printmakers' studio) for my UV exposures which worked great, but the bulb burned out (and no plans by them to replace). >> >> My alternative is one of these: http://www.lamptech.co.uk/Spec%20Sheets/Philips%20HPR125.htm >> which someone from this list was kind enough to send me a few years back (thanks John if you are still here!). Has anyone used one of these? I'm assuming this will be good for smaller sized prints - the specs say the angle of the reflector is 30?. Would it be possible to move the bulb farther away for a larger size, or somehow use reflective material to increase the area size, or is this bulb just not powerful enough for that? Also, do I need to use a fan with this lamp? I am thinking of putting it inside the printing unit below the vacuum press. >> >> If this lamp doesn't work when I decide to go larger, I'm limited to either what's available locally or what I can order on the internet. What's available here are grow lights, fluorescent or mercury halide. My confusion lies in the fact that these are listed in color temperature, whereas recommendations for gum printing are usually given in wavelengths. Is there a correlation between color temperature and wavelength? Is higher color temperature necessarily better (do they produce more UV in the suitable wavelength)? > _______________________________________________ > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > > From laura at lavatop.com Sat Oct 19 15:27:56 2013 From: laura at lavatop.com (Laura V) Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2013 15:27:56 +0000 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: lump gum In-Reply-To: References: <526281E7.8030607@lavatop.com> Message-ID: <5262A4FC.2070603@lavatop.com> Ah...so you put it in the cheesecloth *before* dissolving it...smart! Thanks also for the link :) Laura On 10/19/13 3:01 PM, Kees Brandenburg wrote: > Hi Laura, > > Most of the time I am using gum in lumps. I disolve these to a 26% solution (by weight) by taking 260 grams and add water to a total of 1000gr. I allways fold the lumps in a peace of cheesecloth, bind it together and hang it in the water in a jar. Time does the rest. Squeeze it after 24 hours (or more). The gritty stuf stays in the cloth! > > Powdered gum can also be found at kremerpigmente.com. I always get a much clearer gum with the lump/cheescloth method! > > kees > > > > On 19 okt. 2013, at 14:58, Laura V wrote: > >> Previously, I had used pre-mixed gum arabic and also the powdered version which I mixed myself, but then I ran out. The pre-mixed is so expensive to ship, and I couldn't find the powdered stuff online, so I ordered lump gum which I've never used. I can't find any instructions for mixing it, but finally just put some in a plastic container with roughly an equal amount of water. A day later and some of the lumps have melted, but the bigger ones are still there and it's kind of gritty and hairy looking. I suppose I'll just filter out the lumps and gritty stuff - but was I supposed to do anything differently such as heat the water? >> >> I was really surprised at how large some of the lumps were - I was expecting something where the lumps were more evenly sized. Has anyone used this stuff? Here's an image: http://lauraval.com/gumlumps.jpg That's a 2-liter sized ice-cream container so those lumps are BIG! > _______________________________________________ > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > > From laura at lavatop.com Sat Oct 19 15:40:09 2013 From: laura at lavatop.com (Laura V) Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2013 15:40:09 +0000 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: lump gum In-Reply-To: References: <526281E7.8030607@lavatop.com> <47651C61D98A4B7CAFFA30FA1EFC044F@FireBreather> Message-ID: <5262A7D9.2040105@lavatop.com> Thanks for this. I have not used a preservative before (mainly because I don't know where to buy it). I usually just mixed a small batch (when I had the powdered stuff) and kept it in the fridge and used it within 2 weeks. Unless, is glyoxol a preservative? I have some that I used in paper sizing. It would be handier to always have the gum pre-mixed. Laura On 10/19/13 3:01 PM, Guido Ceuppens wrote: > Laura, > > I used the following procedure with lumps of gum: > > 300 grs of gum are slowly dissolved in 850 ml of cold water, this may take > several days. The impurities are then filtered or fished out, some > recommend to suspend the lumps of gum in a muslin bag to prevent the > impurities to float in the solution. Once dissolved a preservation agent > must be added to the solution: in the past I have added either 15 ml of > formol or 7.5 grs of sodium benzoate. I have used the thus prepared gum for > years without it going bad (I mainly use casein now but occasionally use > gum that was prepared from powder ?same procedure- 7 years ago). > > Welcome back and good luck, > > Guido > > ______________________________________________ > >> Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org >> > _______________________________________________ > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > > From henry.rattle at ntlworld.com Sat Oct 19 15:40:54 2013 From: henry.rattle at ntlworld.com (Henry Rattle) Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2013 17:40:54 +0200 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: lump gum In-Reply-To: References: <526281E7.8030607@lavatop.com> Message-ID: I get lump gum from Cornelissen in London, and make up (from memory, I'm away from home) 70 grams in 300 ml water, which looks about the same concentration as Kees is using. Leave in a jar with a lid so you can shake it up regularly (otherwise it turns into a sticky mass that takes forever to dissolve) and it dissolves in about 24 hours. Filter out the twigs, insect wings etc (I use two layers of the thin domestic cleaning cloths that in UK are called J-cloths) and the result is a lovely clear gum to which I add a little preservative-I use a few drops of formalin because I have it, but others use thymol or other preservatives. The made-up gum lasts very well - I've used it three years on with good results. Best wishes Henry Sent from my iPad > On Oct 19, 2013, at 17:01, Kees Brandenburg wrote: > > Hi Laura, > > Most of the time I am using gum in lumps. I disolve these to a 26% solution (by weight) by taking 260 grams and add water to a total of 1000gr. I allways fold the lumps in a peace of cheesecloth, bind it together and hang it in the water in a jar. Time does the rest. Squeeze it after 24 hours (or more). The gritty stuf stays in the cloth! > > Powdered gum can also be found at kremerpigmente.com. I always get a much clearer gum with the lump/cheescloth method! > > kees > > > >> On 19 okt. 2013, at 14:58, Laura V wrote: >> >> Previously, I had used pre-mixed gum arabic and also the powdered version which I mixed myself, but then I ran out. The pre-mixed is so expensive to ship, and I couldn't find the powdered stuff online, so I ordered lump gum which I've never used. I can't find any instructions for mixing it, but finally just put some in a plastic container with roughly an equal amount of water. A day later and some of the lumps have melted, but the bigger ones are still there and it's kind of gritty and hairy looking. I suppose I'll just filter out the lumps and gritty stuff - but was I supposed to do anything differently such as heat the water? >> >> I was really surprised at how large some of the lumps were - I was expecting something where the lumps were more evenly sized. Has anyone used this stuff? Here's an image: http://lauraval.com/gumlumps.jpg That's a 2-liter sized ice-cream container so those lumps are BIG! > > _______________________________________________ > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org From jorj at jorj.org Sat Oct 19 15:41:45 2013 From: jorj at jorj.org (Jorj Bauer) Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2013 11:41:45 -0400 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: UV lighting In-Reply-To: <5262A27B.80603@lavatop.com> References: <52628EDF.5000608@lavatop.com> <5262A27B.80603@lavatop.com> Message-ID: I have a homemade bank of 10 blacklights, separated by about 1 cm each. I once tested putting casein-on-glass prints directly on the bulbs themselves. The print was faster (because it was about 15 cm closer to the light source) but there was no obvious banding. My takeaway was that spacing between the bulbs isn't critical for the kind of prints I make. For those that are interested, they're these self-contained blacklight units, which I wired to two switches: http://www.homedepot.com/p/GE-22-in-Black-Plug-In-Fluorescent-Light-10186/202024447 -- Jorj On Oct 19, 2013, at 11:17 AM, Laura V wrote: > Thanks for this info. Good to know that you can go larger - but to be clear, by large I mean A3 size as opposed to A4. > > I do have a ballast that came with the bulb. > > About the bank of UV...I notice they are practically touching. Is this because the light needs to be direct and not reflected? (as opposed to for example the grow lights pictured here, which are spaced apart in a relector) http://innigardar.is/index.php?dispatch=products.view&product_id=29845 > > Laura > > On 10/19/13 2:50 PM, Kees Brandenburg wrote: >> Hi Laura, >> >> Philips HPR125 bulbs need a balast (transformator) in the circuit. With one lamp you can expose pretty large prints by adjusting the height. But at some point exposure times gets too long. Compared to a bank of UV fluorescent tubes HPR125 need 2 stops more expores 8 min vs 2 min. in my setup. >> >> I use both in my studio and kind of like the HPR, more a point light source and less diffuse, which gives somewhat more punch to a gumprint. >> >> By the way, this is my bank of UV TL: http://polychrome.nl/techlog/simple-and-cheap-uv-unit >> >> Kees >> >> >> On 19 okt. 2013, at 15:53, Laura V wrote: >> >>> I had been using a vacuum light unit (used by plate or screen printers at my local printmakers' studio) for my UV exposures which worked great, but the bulb burned out (and no plans by them to replace). >>> >>> My alternative is one of these: http://www.lamptech.co.uk/Spec%20Sheets/Philips%20HPR125.htm >>> which someone from this list was kind enough to send me a few years back (thanks John if you are still here!). Has anyone used one of these? I'm assuming this will be good for smaller sized prints - the specs say the angle of the reflector is 30?. Would it be possible to move the bulb farther away for a larger size, or somehow use reflective material to increase the area size, or is this bulb just not powerful enough for that? Also, do I need to use a fan with this lamp? I am thinking of putting it inside the printing unit below the vacuum press. >>> >>> If this lamp doesn't work when I decide to go larger, I'm limited to either what's available locally or what I can order on the internet. What's available here are grow lights, fluorescent or mercury halide. My confusion lies in the fact that these are listed in color temperature, whereas recommendations for gum printing are usually given in wavelengths. Is there a correlation between color temperature and wavelength? Is higher color temperature necessarily better (do they produce more UV in the suitable wavelength)? >> _______________________________________________ >> Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org From jorj at jorj.org Sat Oct 19 15:46:32 2013 From: jorj at jorj.org (Jorj Bauer) Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2013 11:46:32 -0400 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: lump gum In-Reply-To: <5262A7D9.2040105@lavatop.com> References: <526281E7.8030607@lavatop.com> <47651C61D98A4B7CAFFA30FA1EFC044F@FireBreather> <5262A7D9.2040105@lavatop.com> Message-ID: <2E559939-42A0-4288-A89A-E8627A7ABBA5@jorj.org> Glyoxol is a hardener. You probably don't want to use that as a preservative for gum. Thymol should work. I'd be surprised if you couldn't find that; it's commonly used as an anti-fungal for finger- and toe-nails. -- Jorj On Oct 19, 2013, at 11:40 AM, Laura V wrote: > Thanks for this. I have not used a preservative before (mainly because I don't know where to buy it). I usually just mixed a small batch (when I had the powdered stuff) and kept it in the fridge and used it within 2 weeks. > > Unless, is glyoxol a preservative? I have some that I used in paper sizing. It would be handier to always have the gum pre-mixed. > > Laura > > On 10/19/13 3:01 PM, Guido Ceuppens wrote: >> Laura, >> >> I used the following procedure with lumps of gum: >> >> 300 grs of gum are slowly dissolved in 850 ml of cold water, this may take >> several days. The impurities are then filtered or fished out, some >> recommend to suspend the lumps of gum in a muslin bag to prevent the >> impurities to float in the solution. Once dissolved a preservation agent >> must be added to the solution: in the past I have added either 15 ml of >> formol or 7.5 grs of sodium benzoate. I have used the thus prepared gum for >> years without it going bad (I mainly use casein now but occasionally use >> gum that was prepared from powder ?same procedure- 7 years ago). >> >> Welcome back and good luck, >> >> Guido >> >> ______________________________________________ >> >>> Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org From workshops at polychrome.nl Sat Oct 19 15:56:52 2013 From: workshops at polychrome.nl (Kees Brandenburg) Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2013 17:56:52 +0200 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: lump gum In-Reply-To: <2E559939-42A0-4288-A89A-E8627A7ABBA5@jorj.org> References: <526281E7.8030607@lavatop.com> <47651C61D98A4B7CAFFA30FA1EFC044F@FireBreather> <5262A7D9.2040105@lavatop.com> <2E559939-42A0-4288-A89A-E8627A7ABBA5@jorj.org> Message-ID: gum is a polysaccharide, it will not be hardened by aldehydes like formalin or glyoxal! -k On 19 okt. 2013, at 17:46, Jorj Bauer wrote: > Glyoxol is a hardener. You probably don't want to use that as a preservative for gum. > > Thymol should work. I'd be surprised if you couldn't find that; it's commonly used as an anti-fungal for finger- and toe-nails. > > -- Jorj From laura at lavatop.com Sat Oct 19 16:00:44 2013 From: laura at lavatop.com (Laura V) Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2013 16:00:44 +0000 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: lump gum In-Reply-To: <2E559939-42A0-4288-A89A-E8627A7ABBA5@jorj.org> References: <526281E7.8030607@lavatop.com> <47651C61D98A4B7CAFFA30FA1EFC044F@FireBreather> <5262A7D9.2040105@lavatop.com> <2E559939-42A0-4288-A89A-E8627A7ABBA5@jorj.org> Message-ID: <5262ACAC.1070604@lavatop.com> Oh I see, so maybe at the drug store. I didn't know what it was. I read that it is derived from thyme, so maybe thyme oil would work as well? Thanks! Laura On 10/19/13 3:46 PM, Jorj Bauer wrote: > Glyoxol is a hardener. You probably don't want to use that as a preservative for gum. > > Thymol should work. I'd be surprised if you couldn't find that; it's commonly used as an anti-fungal for finger- and toe-nails. > > -- Jorj > > On Oct 19, 2013, at 11:40 AM, Laura V wrote: > >> Thanks for this. I have not used a preservative before (mainly because I don't know where to buy it). I usually just mixed a small batch (when I had the powdered stuff) and kept it in the fridge and used it within 2 weeks. >> >> Unless, is glyoxol a preservative? I have some that I used in paper sizing. It would be handier to always have the gum pre-mixed. >> >> Laura >> >> On 10/19/13 3:01 PM, Guido Ceuppens wrote: >>> Laura, >>> >>> I used the following procedure with lumps of gum: >>> >>> 300 grs of gum are slowly dissolved in 850 ml of cold water, this may take >>> several days. The impurities are then filtered or fished out, some >>> recommend to suspend the lumps of gum in a muslin bag to prevent the >>> impurities to float in the solution. Once dissolved a preservation agent >>> must be added to the solution: in the past I have added either 15 ml of >>> formol or 7.5 grs of sodium benzoate. I have used the thus prepared gum for >>> years without it going bad (I mainly use casein now but occasionally use >>> gum that was prepared from powder ?same procedure- 7 years ago). >>> >>> Welcome back and good luck, >>> >>> Guido >>> >>> ______________________________________________ >>> >>>> Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org >>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > _______________________________________________ > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > > From laura at lavatop.com Sat Oct 19 16:02:35 2013 From: laura at lavatop.com (Laura V) Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2013 16:02:35 +0000 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: lump gum In-Reply-To: References: <526281E7.8030607@lavatop.com> Message-ID: <5262AD1B.5040808@lavatop.com> Cornelissen is where I got this, so it must be the same stuff. I like the shaking idea, mine is getting pretty sticky :) Thanks! Laura On 10/19/13 3:40 PM, Henry Rattle wrote: > I get lump gum from Cornelissen in London, and make up (from memory, I'm away from home) 70 grams in 300 ml water, which looks about the same concentration as Kees is using. Leave in a jar with a lid so you can shake it up regularly (otherwise it turns into a sticky mass that takes forever to dissolve) and it dissolves in about 24 hours. Filter out the twigs, insect wings etc (I use two layers of the thin domestic cleaning cloths that in UK are called J-cloths) and the result is a lovely clear gum to which I add a little preservative-I use a few drops of formalin because I have it, but others use thymol or other preservatives. The made-up gum lasts very well - I've used it three years on with good results. > > Best wishes > > Henry > > Sent from my iPad > >> On Oct 19, 2013, at 17:01, Kees Brandenburg wrote: >> >> Hi Laura, >> >> Most of the time I am using gum in lumps. I disolve these to a 26% solution (by weight) by taking 260 grams and add water to a total of 1000gr. I allways fold the lumps in a peace of cheesecloth, bind it together and hang it in the water in a jar. Time does the rest. Squeeze it after 24 hours (or more). The gritty stuf stays in the cloth! >> >> Powdered gum can also be found at kremerpigmente.com. I always get a much clearer gum with the lump/cheescloth method! >> >> kees >> >> >> >>> On 19 okt. 2013, at 14:58, Laura V wrote: >>> >>> Previously, I had used pre-mixed gum arabic and also the powdered version which I mixed myself, but then I ran out. The pre-mixed is so expensive to ship, and I couldn't find the powdered stuff online, so I ordered lump gum which I've never used. I can't find any instructions for mixing it, but finally just put some in a plastic container with roughly an equal amount of water. A day later and some of the lumps have melted, but the bigger ones are still there and it's kind of gritty and hairy looking. I suppose I'll just filter out the lumps and gritty stuff - but was I supposed to do anything differently such as heat the water? >>> >>> I was really surprised at how large some of the lumps were - I was expecting something where the lumps were more evenly sized. Has anyone used this stuff? Here's an image: http://lauraval.com/gumlumps.jpg That's a 2-liter sized ice-cream container so those lumps are BIG! >> _______________________________________________ >> Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > _______________________________________________ > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > > From jorj at jorj.org Sat Oct 19 16:23:03 2013 From: jorj at jorj.org (Jorj Bauer) Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2013 12:23:03 -0400 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: lump gum In-Reply-To: References: <526281E7.8030607@lavatop.com> <47651C61D98A4B7CAFFA30FA1EFC044F@FireBreather> <5262A7D9.2040105@lavatop.com> <2E559939-42A0-4288-A89A-E8627A7ABBA5@jorj.org> Message-ID: <84DCB39C-F713-42EA-8E1E-704145C1FFE5@jorj.org> Shows what I know ;) Sent from my iPhone On Oct 19, 2013, at 11:56 AM, Kees Brandenburg wrote: > gum is a polysaccharide, it will not be hardened by aldehydes like formalin or glyoxal! > > -k > > On 19 okt. 2013, at 17:46, Jorj Bauer wrote: > >> Glyoxol is a hardener. You probably don't want to use that as a preservative for gum. >> >> Thymol should work. I'd be surprised if you couldn't find that; it's commonly used as an anti-fungal for finger- and toe-nails. >> >> -- Jorj > > _______________________________________________ > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org From jorj at jorj.org Sat Oct 19 16:27:40 2013 From: jorj at jorj.org (Jorj Bauer) Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2013 12:27:40 -0400 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: lump gum In-Reply-To: <5262ACAC.1070604@lavatop.com> References: <526281E7.8030607@lavatop.com> <47651C61D98A4B7CAFFA30FA1EFC044F@FireBreather> <5262A7D9.2040105@lavatop.com> <2E559939-42A0-4288-A89A-E8627A7ABBA5@jorj.org> <5262ACAC.1070604@lavatop.com> Message-ID: Thyme oil might work. Don't know what impurities might come with it. The stuff at the drug store is generally just thymol in alcohol. Sent from my iPhone On Oct 19, 2013, at 12:00 PM, Laura V wrote: > Oh I see, so maybe at the drug store. I didn't know what it was. I read that it is derived from thyme, so maybe thyme oil would work as well? Thanks! > > Laura > > On 10/19/13 3:46 PM, Jorj Bauer wrote: >> Glyoxol is a hardener. You probably don't want to use that as a preservative for gum. >> >> Thymol should work. I'd be surprised if you couldn't find that; it's commonly used as an anti-fungal for finger- and toe-nails. >> >> -- Jorj >> >> On Oct 19, 2013, at 11:40 AM, Laura V wrote: >> >>> Thanks for this. I have not used a preservative before (mainly because I don't know where to buy it). I usually just mixed a small batch (when I had the powdered stuff) and kept it in the fridge and used it within 2 weeks. >>> >>> Unless, is glyoxol a preservative? I have some that I used in paper sizing. It would be handier to always have the gum pre-mixed. >>> >>> Laura >>> >>> On 10/19/13 3:01 PM, Guido Ceuppens wrote: >>>> Laura, >>>> >>>> I used the following procedure with lumps of gum: >>>> >>>> 300 grs of gum are slowly dissolved in 850 ml of cold water, this may take >>>> several days. The impurities are then filtered or fished out, some >>>> recommend to suspend the lumps of gum in a muslin bag to prevent the >>>> impurities to float in the solution. Once dissolved a preservation agent >>>> must be added to the solution: in the past I have added either 15 ml of >>>> formol or 7.5 grs of sodium benzoate. I have used the thus prepared gum for >>>> years without it going bad (I mainly use casein now but occasionally use >>>> gum that was prepared from powder ?same procedure- 7 years ago). >>>> >>>> Welcome back and good luck, >>>> >>>> Guido >>>> >>>> ______________________________________________ >>>> >>>>> Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org >> _______________________________________________ >> Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > > _______________________________________________ > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org From johnbrewerphotography at gmail.com Sat Oct 19 17:10:06 2013 From: johnbrewerphotography at gmail.com (John Brewer) Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2013 18:10:06 +0100 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: lump gum In-Reply-To: <5262AD1B.5040808@lavatop.com> References: <526281E7.8030607@lavatop.com> <5262AD1B.5040808@lavatop.com> Message-ID: <95011B96-8EC4-4113-8B1B-726E55F5DEC3@gmail.com> I get the powdered stuff from http://www.lawrence.co.uk/ It's not as clear as the over priced W&N stuff but it makes no difference to the gum print, well my prints. Interestingly, well to me at least (!) Cornelissen was the home of Frederick Scott Archer mid 19th century who invented the wetplate process. I've always thought it fitting that an independent art supplier now resides there. J Sent from my iPhone On 19 Oct 2013, at 17:02, Laura V wrote: > Cornelissen is where I got this, so it must be the same stuff. I like the shaking idea, mine is getting pretty sticky :) Thanks! > Laura > > On 10/19/13 3:40 PM, Henry Rattle wrote: >> I get lump gum from Cornelissen in London, and make up (from memory, I'm away from home) 70 grams in 300 ml water, which looks about the same concentration as Kees is using. Leave in a jar with a lid so you can shake it up regularly (otherwise it turns into a sticky mass that takes forever to dissolve) and it dissolves in about 24 hours. Filter out the twigs, insect wings etc (I use two layers of the thin domestic cleaning cloths that in UK are called J-cloths) and the result is a lovely clear gum to which I add a little preservative-I use a few drops of formalin because I have it, but others use thymol or other preservatives. The made-up gum lasts very well - I've used it three years on with good results. >> >> Best wishes >> >> Henry >> >> Sent from my iPad >> >>> On Oct 19, 2013, at 17:01, Kees Brandenburg wrote: >>> >>> Hi Laura, >>> >>> Most of the time I am using gum in lumps. I disolve these to a 26% solution (by weight) by taking 260 grams and add water to a total of 1000gr. I allways fold the lumps in a peace of cheesecloth, bind it together and hang it in the water in a jar. Time does the rest. Squeeze it after 24 hours (or more). The gritty stuf stays in the cloth! >>> >>> Powdered gum can also be found at kremerpigmente.com. I always get a much clearer gum with the lump/cheescloth method! >>> >>> kees >>> >>> >>> >>>> On 19 okt. 2013, at 14:58, Laura V wrote: >>>> >>>> Previously, I had used pre-mixed gum arabic and also the powdered version which I mixed myself, but then I ran out. The pre-mixed is so expensive to ship, and I couldn't find the powdered stuff online, so I ordered lump gum which I've never used. I can't find any instructions for mixing it, but finally just put some in a plastic container with roughly an equal amount of water. A day later and some of the lumps have melted, but the bigger ones are still there and it's kind of gritty and hairy looking. I suppose I'll just filter out the lumps and gritty stuff - but was I supposed to do anything differently such as heat the water? >>>> >>>> I was really surprised at how large some of the lumps were - I was expecting something where the lumps were more evenly sized. Has anyone used this stuff? Here's an image: http://lauraval.com/gumlumps.jpg That's a 2-liter sized ice-cream container so those lumps are BIG! >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org >> _______________________________________________ >> Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org From pfriedrichsen at sympatico.ca Sat Oct 19 18:52:55 2013 From: pfriedrichsen at sympatico.ca (Peter Friedrichsen) Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2013 14:52:55 -0400 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: lump gum In-Reply-To: References: <526281E7.8030607@lavatop.com> <47651C61D98A4B7CAFFA30FA1EFC044F@FireBreather> <5262A7D9.2040105@lavatop.com> <2E559939-42A0-4288-A89A-E8627A7ABBA5@jorj.org> <5262ACAC.1070604@lavatop.com> Message-ID: i tried thyme essential oil once but it did not work nearly as well as thymol. I discovered that there are many other components that dilute the actual thymol, such as terpenes etc... I did manage to buy 100g of pure thymol crystals from an aromatics supply store but this is in Canada. Price was about $8.00/100 g a couple of years ago...a lifetime supply. Peter Friedrichsen On 2013-10-19, at 12:27 PM, Jorj Bauer wrote: > Thyme oil might work. Don't know what impurities might come with it. The stuff at the drug store is generally just thymol in alcohol. > > Sent from my iPhone > > On Oct 19, 2013, at 12:00 PM, Laura V wrote: > >> Oh I see, so maybe at the drug store. I didn't know what it was. I read that it is derived from thyme, so maybe thyme oil would work as well? Thanks! >> >> Laura >> >> On 10/19/13 3:46 PM, Jorj Bauer wrote: >>> Glyoxol is a hardener. You probably don't want to use that as a preservative for gum. >>> >>> Thymol should work. I'd be surprised if you couldn't find that; it's commonly used as an anti-fungal for finger- and toe-nails. >>> >>> -- Jorj >>> >>> On Oct 19, 2013, at 11:40 AM, Laura V wrote: >>> >>>> Thanks for this. I have not used a preservative before (mainly because I don't know where to buy it). I usually just mixed a small batch (when I had the powdered stuff) and kept it in the fridge and used it within 2 weeks. >>>> >>>> Unless, is glyoxol a preservative? I have some that I used in paper sizing. It would be handier to always have the gum pre-mixed. >>>> >>>> Laura >>>> >>>> On 10/19/13 3:01 PM, Guido Ceuppens wrote: >>>>> Laura, >>>>> >>>>> I used the following procedure with lumps of gum: >>>>> >>>>> 300 grs of gum are slowly dissolved in 850 ml of cold water, this may take >>>>> several days. The impurities are then filtered or fished out, some >>>>> recommend to suspend the lumps of gum in a muslin bag to prevent the >>>>> impurities to float in the solution. Once dissolved a preservation agent >>>>> must be added to the solution: in the past I have added either 15 ml of >>>>> formol or 7.5 grs of sodium benzoate. I have used the thus prepared gum for >>>>> years without it going bad (I mainly use casein now but occasionally use >>>>> gum that was prepared from powder ?same procedure- 7 years ago). >>>>> >>>>> Welcome back and good luck, >>>>> >>>>> Guido >>>>> >>>>> ______________________________________________ >>>>> >>>>>> Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > _______________________________________________ > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org From laura at lavatop.com Sat Oct 19 20:41:41 2013 From: laura at lavatop.com (Laura V) Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2013 20:41:41 +0000 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: lump gum In-Reply-To: <95011B96-8EC4-4113-8B1B-726E55F5DEC3@gmail.com> References: <526281E7.8030607@lavatop.com> <5262AD1B.5040808@lavatop.com> <95011B96-8EC4-4113-8B1B-726E55F5DEC3@gmail.com> Message-ID: <5262EE85.30402@lavatop.com> Thanks for the link - and yes that is fitting :) Laura On 10/19/13 5:10 PM, John Brewer wrote: > I get the powdered stuff from http://www.lawrence.co.uk/ It's not as clear as the over priced W&N stuff but it makes no difference to the gum print, well my prints. > > Interestingly, well to me at least (!) Cornelissen was the home of Frederick Scott Archer mid 19th century who invented the wetplate process. I've always thought it fitting that an independent art supplier now resides there. > > J > > > Sent from my iPhone > > On 19 Oct 2013, at 17:02, Laura V wrote: > >> Cornelissen is where I got this, so it must be the same stuff. I like the shaking idea, mine is getting pretty sticky :) Thanks! >> Laura >> >> On 10/19/13 3:40 PM, Henry Rattle wrote: >>> I get lump gum from Cornelissen in London, and make up (from memory, I'm away from home) 70 grams in 300 ml water, which looks about the same concentration as Kees is using. Leave in a jar with a lid so you can shake it up regularly (otherwise it turns into a sticky mass that takes forever to dissolve) and it dissolves in about 24 hours. Filter out the twigs, insect wings etc (I use two layers of the thin domestic cleaning cloths that in UK are called J-cloths) and the result is a lovely clear gum to which I add a little preservative-I use a few drops of formalin because I have it, but others use thymol or other preservatives. The made-up gum lasts very well - I've used it three years on with good results. >>> >>> Best wishes >>> >>> Henry >>> >>> Sent from my iPad >>> >>>> On Oct 19, 2013, at 17:01, Kees Brandenburg wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi Laura, >>>> >>>> Most of the time I am using gum in lumps. I disolve these to a 26% solution (by weight) by taking 260 grams and add water to a total of 1000gr. I allways fold the lumps in a peace of cheesecloth, bind it together and hang it in the water in a jar. Time does the rest. Squeeze it after 24 hours (or more). The gritty stuf stays in the cloth! >>>> >>>> Powdered gum can also be found at kremerpigmente.com. I always get a much clearer gum with the lump/cheescloth method! >>>> >>>> kees >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> On 19 okt. 2013, at 14:58, Laura V wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Previously, I had used pre-mixed gum arabic and also the powdered version which I mixed myself, but then I ran out. The pre-mixed is so expensive to ship, and I couldn't find the powdered stuff online, so I ordered lump gum which I've never used. I can't find any instructions for mixing it, but finally just put some in a plastic container with roughly an equal amount of water. A day later and some of the lumps have melted, but the bigger ones are still there and it's kind of gritty and hairy looking. I suppose I'll just filter out the lumps and gritty stuff - but was I supposed to do anything differently such as heat the water? >>>>> >>>>> I was really surprised at how large some of the lumps were - I was expecting something where the lumps were more evenly sized. Has anyone used this stuff? Here's an image: http://lauraval.com/gumlumps.jpg That's a 2-liter sized ice-cream container so those lumps are BIG! >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org >>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > _______________________________________________ > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > > From laura at lavatop.com Sat Oct 19 20:42:44 2013 From: laura at lavatop.com (Laura V) Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2013 20:42:44 +0000 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: lump gum In-Reply-To: References: <526281E7.8030607@lavatop.com> <47651C61D98A4B7CAFFA30FA1EFC044F@FireBreather> <5262A7D9.2040105@lavatop.com> <2E559939-42A0-4288-A89A-E8627A7ABBA5@jorj.org> <5262ACAC.1070604@lavatop.com> Message-ID: <5262EEC4.8070506@lavatop.com> I see, then I'll scratch that idea. Thanks! Laura On 10/19/13 6:52 PM, Peter Friedrichsen wrote: > i tried thyme essential oil once but it did not work nearly as well as thymol. I discovered that there are many other components that dilute the actual thymol, such as terpenes etc... > > I did manage to buy 100g of pure thymol crystals from an aromatics supply store but this is in Canada. Price was about $8.00/100 g a couple of years ago...a lifetime supply. > > Peter Friedrichsen > > > > > On 2013-10-19, at 12:27 PM, Jorj Bauer wrote: > >> Thyme oil might work. Don't know what impurities might come with it. The stuff at the drug store is generally just thymol in alcohol. >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> On Oct 19, 2013, at 12:00 PM, Laura V wrote: >> >>> Oh I see, so maybe at the drug store. I didn't know what it was. I read that it is derived from thyme, so maybe thyme oil would work as well? Thanks! >>> >>> Laura >>> >>> On 10/19/13 3:46 PM, Jorj Bauer wrote: >>>> Glyoxol is a hardener. You probably don't want to use that as a preservative for gum. >>>> >>>> Thymol should work. I'd be surprised if you couldn't find that; it's commonly used as an anti-fungal for finger- and toe-nails. >>>> >>>> -- Jorj >>>> >>>> On Oct 19, 2013, at 11:40 AM, Laura V wrote: >>>> >>>>> Thanks for this. I have not used a preservative before (mainly because I don't know where to buy it). I usually just mixed a small batch (when I had the powdered stuff) and kept it in the fridge and used it within 2 weeks. >>>>> >>>>> Unless, is glyoxol a preservative? I have some that I used in paper sizing. It would be handier to always have the gum pre-mixed. >>>>> >>>>> Laura >>>>> >>>>> On 10/19/13 3:01 PM, Guido Ceuppens wrote: >>>>>> Laura, >>>>>> >>>>>> I used the following procedure with lumps of gum: >>>>>> >>>>>> 300 grs of gum are slowly dissolved in 850 ml of cold water, this may take >>>>>> several days. The impurities are then filtered or fished out, some >>>>>> recommend to suspend the lumps of gum in a muslin bag to prevent the >>>>>> impurities to float in the solution. Once dissolved a preservation agent >>>>>> must be added to the solution: in the past I have added either 15 ml of >>>>>> formol or 7.5 grs of sodium benzoate. I have used the thus prepared gum for >>>>>> years without it going bad (I mainly use casein now but occasionally use >>>>>> gum that was prepared from powder ?same procedure- 7 years ago). >>>>>> >>>>>> Welcome back and good luck, >>>>>> >>>>>> Guido >>>>>> >>>>>> ______________________________________________ >>>>>> >>>>>>> Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org >> _______________________________________________ >> Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > _______________________________________________ > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > > From bobkiss at caribsurf.com Sat Oct 19 20:49:28 2013 From: bobkiss at caribsurf.com (BOB KISS) Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2013 16:49:28 -0400 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: UV lighting In-Reply-To: <5262A164.1050303@lavatop.com> References: <52628EDF.5000608@lavatop.com> <5262A164.1050303@lavatop.com> Message-ID: Try this: http://www.danagraf.com/cgi-files/mdmgfx/file-596-77197-1951.pdf and the manufacturer seems to be http://www.danagraph.de/en CHEERS! BOB _____ From: alt-photo-process-list-bounces at lists.altphotolist.org [mailto:alt-photo-process-list-bounces at lists.altphotolist.org] On Behalf Of Laura V Sent: Saturday, October 19, 2013 11:13 AM To: alt-photo-process-list at lists.altphotolist.org Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: UV lighting Oh, that's actually not a bad idea! The unit is a Helioprint PD 130. I couldn't really find any info online, but I intend to check the bulb and see if I can find that online. It would be great to continue using the unit, it's so handy having the vacuum press and timer. Heh, I wonder if I'm the one who burned out the bulb in the first place from so much use :) Laura On 10/19/13 2:41 PM, BOB KISS wrote: > DEAR LAURA, > > Which plate burner were you using at your local printmaker?s > studio? Why not make a deal with them where you buy the replacement bulb in > return for many, many hours of use of the plate burner? > > CHEERS! > > BOB > > > > _____ > > From: alt-photo-process-list-bounces at lists.altphotolist.org > [mailto:alt-photo-process-list-bounces at lists.altphotolist.org] On Behalf Of > Laura V > Sent: Saturday, October 19, 2013 9:54 AM > To: alt-photo-process-list at lists.altphotolist.org > Subject: [Alt-photo] UV lighting > > > > I had been using a vacuum light unit (used by plate or screen printers > at my local printmakers' studio) for my UV exposures which worked great, > but the bulb burned out (and no plans by them to replace). > > My alternative is one of these: > http://www.lamptech.co.uk/Spec%20Sheets/Philips%20HPR125.htm > which someone from this list was kind enough to send me a few years back > (thanks John if you are still here!). Has anyone used one of these? I'm > assuming this will be good for smaller sized prints - the specs say the > angle of the reflector is 30?. Would it be possible to move the bulb > farther away for a larger size, or somehow use reflective material to > increase the area size, or is this bulb just not powerful enough for > that? Also, do I need to use a fan with this lamp? I am thinking of > putting it inside the printing unit below the vacuum press. > > If this lamp doesn't work when I decide to go larger, I'm limited to > either what's available locally or what I can order on the internet. > What's available here are grow lights, fluorescent or mercury halide. My > confusion lies in the fact that these are listed in color temperature, > whereas recommendations for gum printing are usually given in > wavelengths. Is there a correlation between color temperature and > wavelength? Is higher color temperature necessarily better (do they > produce more UV in the suitable wavelength)? > > Thanks! > Laura > _______________________________________________ > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > > > > __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature > database 8938 (20131019) __________ > > The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. > > http://www.eset.com > > > > __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature > database 8938 (20131019) __________ > > The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. > > http://www.eset.com > > _______________________________________________ > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > > _______________________________________________ Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 8938 (20131019) __________ The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. http://www.eset.com __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 8939 (20131019) __________ The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. http://www.eset.com From bobkiss at caribsurf.com Sun Oct 20 23:33:55 2013 From: bobkiss at caribsurf.com (bobkiss @caribsurf.com) Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2013 19:33:55 -0400 Subject: [Alt-photo] ANYONE FROM LIST AT APIS? Message-ID: DEAR LIST, Did anyone from the list attend APIS this year? I didn't have enough time to ask after my video presentation on Uranotypes was show if anyone was there from the list. I would have liked to meet and chat a bit. It looked like a really interesting and diverse set of presentations. CHEERS! BOB From christinazanderson at gmail.com Mon Oct 21 00:51:17 2013 From: christinazanderson at gmail.com (Christina Z. Anderson) Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2013 18:51:17 -0600 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: ANYONE FROM LIST AT APIS? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7B76E5DF-10CE-4728-80D6-5CCE628954B2@gmail.com> Dear Bob, I was there and your uranotype presentation was STELLAR. First of all, the DVD was professionally done, answered all questions, and gave all an idea of your darkroom space, your working procedure, how careful you are to be mindful of the chemistry, and exactly how you make a uranotype. The audience was entranced with your presentation and you could have heard a pin drop. Second, your wonderful and quirky sense of humor made the presentation! It was fun to see you in person but also just everything about it was tiptop and the shots of where you live, beach scenes, bobbling boats, made all of us want to visit you so beware. There were about 40 people at APIS watching your presentation. I had to run out and get my dongle from my car for the next presentation so I missed the live streaming/Skype where questions were asked/answered which was a bummer but at least I got to see you speak. We all examined your uranotype prints which was also a real boon to being there at APIS. So great job and glad to meet you even if only a semi-one-way street! Chris On Oct 20, 2013, at 5:33 PM, bobkiss @caribsurf.com wrote: > DEAR LIST, > > Did anyone from the list attend APIS this year? I didn't have enough > time to ask after my video presentation on Uranotypes was show if anyone > was there from the list. I would have liked to meet and chat a bit. > It looked like a really interesting and diverse set of presentations. > > CHEERS! > BOB > _______________________________________________ > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org From jason at lucidperceptions.com Mon Oct 21 03:34:19 2013 From: jason at lucidperceptions.com (J. Jason Lazarus) Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2013 21:34:19 -0600 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: ANYONE FROM LIST AT APIS? In-Reply-To: <7B76E5DF-10CE-4728-80D6-5CCE628954B2@gmail.com> References: <7B76E5DF-10CE-4728-80D6-5CCE628954B2@gmail.com> Message-ID: <56BFE618-0766-40F0-842D-CA30381651A6@lucidperceptions.com> I'll second everything that Chris mentioned; I was really focused on your entire presentation and amazed by it - such a wonderfully interesting process that I had no former knowledge of! Thank you so much for your in-depth presentation! J. Jason Lazarus Lucidperceptions.com Sent from my iPhone > On Oct 20, 2013, at 6:51 PM, "Christina Z. Anderson" wrote: > > Dear Bob, > I was there and your uranotype presentation was STELLAR. > > First of all, the DVD was professionally done, answered all questions, and gave all an idea of your darkroom space, your working procedure, how careful you are to be mindful of the chemistry, and exactly how you make a uranotype. The audience was entranced with your presentation and you could have heard a pin drop. > > Second, your wonderful and quirky sense of humor made the presentation! It was fun to see you in person but also just everything about it was tiptop and the shots of where you live, beach scenes, bobbling boats, made all of us want to visit you so beware. > > There were about 40 people at APIS watching your presentation. I had to run out and get my dongle from my car for the next presentation so I missed the live streaming/Skype where questions were asked/answered which was a bummer but at least I got to see you speak. > > We all examined your uranotype prints which was also a real boon to being there at APIS. > > So great job and glad to meet you even if only a semi-one-way street! > Chris > >> On Oct 20, 2013, at 5:33 PM, bobkiss @caribsurf.com wrote: >> >> DEAR LIST, >> >> Did anyone from the list attend APIS this year? I didn't have enough >> time to ask after my video presentation on Uranotypes was show if anyone >> was there from the list. I would have liked to meet and chat a bit. >> It looked like a really interesting and diverse set of presentations. >> >> CHEERS! >> BOB >> _______________________________________________ >> Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > > _______________________________________________ > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org From bobkiss at caribsurf.com Mon Oct 21 10:34:35 2013 From: bobkiss at caribsurf.com (bobkiss @caribsurf.com) Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2013 06:34:35 -0400 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: ANYONE FROM LIST AT APIS? In-Reply-To: <7B76E5DF-10CE-4728-80D6-5CCE628954B2@gmail.com> References: <7B76E5DF-10CE-4728-80D6-5CCE628954B2@gmail.com> Message-ID: DEAR CHRISTINA, I was hoping you were there! I am sorry I couldn't attend and see your presentation. Maybe some day I will get to Santa Fe. Thanks for your kind words. Making the video was a bit of work and, once one has worked on something, one can no longer clearly see if it is good or not. I am really happy people liked it. CHEERS! BOB On Sun, Oct 20, 2013 at 8:51 PM, Christina Z. Anderson < christinazanderson at gmail.com> wrote: > Dear Bob, > I was there and your uranotype presentation was STELLAR. > > First of all, the DVD was professionally done, answered all questions, and > gave all an idea of your darkroom space, your working procedure, how > careful you are to be mindful of the chemistry, and exactly how you make a > uranotype. The audience was entranced with your presentation and you could > have heard a pin drop. > > Second, your wonderful and quirky sense of humor made the presentation! > It was fun to see you in person but also just everything about it was > tiptop and the shots of where you live, beach scenes, bobbling boats, made > all of us want to visit you so beware. > > There were about 40 people at APIS watching your presentation. I had to > run out and get my dongle from my car for the next presentation so I missed > the live streaming/Skype where questions were asked/answered which was a > bummer but at least I got to see you speak. > > We all examined your uranotype prints which was also a real boon to being > there at APIS. > > So great job and glad to meet you even if only a semi-one-way street! > Chris > > On Oct 20, 2013, at 5:33 PM, bobkiss @caribsurf.com > wrote: > > > DEAR LIST, > > > > Did anyone from the list attend APIS this year? I didn't have enough > > time to ask after my video presentation on Uranotypes was show if anyone > > was there from the list. I would have liked to meet and chat a bit. > > It looked like a really interesting and diverse set of presentations. > > > > CHEERS! > > BOB > > _______________________________________________ > > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > > _______________________________________________ > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > From bobkiss at caribsurf.com Mon Oct 21 10:36:05 2013 From: bobkiss at caribsurf.com (bobkiss @caribsurf.com) Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2013 06:36:05 -0400 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: ANYONE FROM LIST AT APIS? In-Reply-To: <56BFE618-0766-40F0-842D-CA30381651A6@lucidperceptions.com> References: <7B76E5DF-10CE-4728-80D6-5CCE628954B2@gmail.com> <56BFE618-0766-40F0-842D-CA30381651A6@lucidperceptions.com> Message-ID: DEAR J JASON, Thanks for your for your support! It is good to know that people enjoyed and learned from it. CHEERS! BOB On Sun, Oct 20, 2013 at 11:34 PM, J. Jason Lazarus < jason at lucidperceptions.com> wrote: > I'll second everything that Chris mentioned; I was really focused on your > entire presentation and amazed by it - such a wonderfully interesting > process that I had no former knowledge of! Thank you so much for your > in-depth presentation! > > J. Jason Lazarus > Lucidperceptions.com > > Sent from my iPhone > > > On Oct 20, 2013, at 6:51 PM, "Christina Z. Anderson" < > christinazanderson at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Dear Bob, > > I was there and your uranotype presentation was STELLAR. > > > > First of all, the DVD was professionally done, answered all questions, > and gave all an idea of your darkroom space, your working procedure, how > careful you are to be mindful of the chemistry, and exactly how you make a > uranotype. The audience was entranced with your presentation and you could > have heard a pin drop. > > > > Second, your wonderful and quirky sense of humor made the presentation! > It was fun to see you in person but also just everything about it was > tiptop and the shots of where you live, beach scenes, bobbling boats, made > all of us want to visit you so beware. > > > > There were about 40 people at APIS watching your presentation. I had to > run out and get my dongle from my car for the next presentation so I missed > the live streaming/Skype where questions were asked/answered which was a > bummer but at least I got to see you speak. > > > > We all examined your uranotype prints which was also a real boon to > being there at APIS. > > > > So great job and glad to meet you even if only a semi-one-way street! > > Chris > > > >> On Oct 20, 2013, at 5:33 PM, bobkiss @caribsurf.com < > bobkiss at caribsurf.com> wrote: > >> > >> DEAR LIST, > >> > >> Did anyone from the list attend APIS this year? I didn't have enough > >> time to ask after my video presentation on Uranotypes was show if anyone > >> was there from the list. I would have liked to meet and chat a bit. > >> It looked like a really interesting and diverse set of presentations. > >> > >> CHEERS! > >> BOB > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > _______________________________________________ > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > From hchapman at coastside.net Mon Oct 21 22:24:37 2013 From: hchapman at coastside.net (Harlan Chapman) Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2013 16:24:37 -0600 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: ANYONE FROM LIST AT APIS? In-Reply-To: References: <7B76E5DF-10CE-4728-80D6-5CCE628954B2@gmail.com> <56BFE618-0766-40F0-842D-CA30381651A6@lucidperceptions.com> Message-ID: Hello Bob, Another APIS attendee here. I heartily agree with Christina's and Jason's comments on your presentation. Your video was so well done I felt like I was in your darkroom with you making the prints. And thank you for sending your wonderful prints to us to see. You clearly made a big investment in the presentation for us. The outcome was well received much appreciated. Best, -Harlan On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 4:36 AM, bobkiss @caribsurf.com < bobkiss at caribsurf.com> wrote: > DEAR J JASON, > Thanks for your for your support! It is good to know that people > enjoyed and learned from it. > CHEERS! > BOB > > > On Sun, Oct 20, 2013 at 11:34 PM, J. Jason Lazarus < > jason at lucidperceptions.com> wrote: > > > I'll second everything that Chris mentioned; I was really focused on your > > entire presentation and amazed by it - such a wonderfully interesting > > process that I had no former knowledge of! Thank you so much for your > > in-depth presentation! > > > > J. Jason Lazarus > > Lucidperceptions.com > > > > Sent from my iPhone > > > > > On Oct 20, 2013, at 6:51 PM, "Christina Z. Anderson" < > > christinazanderson at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > Dear Bob, > > > I was there and your uranotype presentation was STELLAR. > > > > > > First of all, the DVD was professionally done, answered all questions, > > and gave all an idea of your darkroom space, your working procedure, how > > careful you are to be mindful of the chemistry, and exactly how you make > a > > uranotype. The audience was entranced with your presentation and you > could > > have heard a pin drop. > > > > > > Second, your wonderful and quirky sense of humor made the presentation! > > It was fun to see you in person but also just everything about it was > > tiptop and the shots of where you live, beach scenes, bobbling boats, > made > > all of us want to visit you so beware. > > > > > > There were about 40 people at APIS watching your presentation. I had to > > run out and get my dongle from my car for the next presentation so I > missed > > the live streaming/Skype where questions were asked/answered which was a > > bummer but at least I got to see you speak. > > > > > > We all examined your uranotype prints which was also a real boon to > > being there at APIS. > > > > > > So great job and glad to meet you even if only a semi-one-way street! > > > Chris > > > > > >> On Oct 20, 2013, at 5:33 PM, bobkiss @caribsurf.com < > > bobkiss at caribsurf.com> wrote: > > >> > > >> DEAR LIST, > > >> > > >> Did anyone from the list attend APIS this year? I didn't have > enough > > >> time to ask after my video presentation on Uranotypes was show if > anyone > > >> was there from the list. I would have liked to meet and chat a bit. > > >> It looked like a really interesting and diverse set of > presentations. > > >> > > >> CHEERS! > > >> BOB > > >> _______________________________________________ > > >> Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > > _______________________________________________ > > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > > > _______________________________________________ > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > From C.Breukel at lumc.nl Tue Oct 22 07:43:16 2013 From: C.Breukel at lumc.nl (C.Breukel at lumc.nl) Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2013 07:43:16 +0000 Subject: [Alt-photo] Bob's Uranotype presentation Message-ID: <19BFDE1ACA5CA545BA009EE8205ED4A7243067C7@MAIL-MB2.lumcnet.prod.intern> Bob, I (and many others) were not able to attend your presentation at APIS. Would it be possible to upload your presentation to the public domain (YouTube or similar)? That would be very nice Best, Cor -----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 Harlan Chapman Sent: dinsdag 22 oktober 2013 0:25 To: alt-photo-process-list at lists.altphotolist.org Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: ANYONE FROM LIST AT APIS? Hello Bob, Another APIS attendee here. I heartily agree with Christina's and Jason's comments on your presentation. Your video was so well done I felt like I was in your darkroom with you making the prints. And thank you for sending your wonderful prints to us to see. You clearly made a big investment in the presentation for us. The outcome was well received much appreciated. Best, -Harlan On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 4:36 AM, bobkiss @caribsurf.com < bobkiss at caribsurf.com> wrote: > DEAR J JASON, > Thanks for your for your support! It is good to know that people > enjoyed and learned from it. > CHEERS! > BOB > > > On Sun, Oct 20, 2013 at 11:34 PM, J. Jason Lazarus < > jason at lucidperceptions.com> wrote: > > > I'll second everything that Chris mentioned; I was really focused on > > your entire presentation and amazed by it - such a wonderfully > > interesting process that I had no former knowledge of! Thank you so > > much for your in-depth presentation! > > > > J. Jason Lazarus > > Lucidperceptions.com > > > > Sent from my iPhone > > > > > On Oct 20, 2013, at 6:51 PM, "Christina Z. Anderson" < > > christinazanderson at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > Dear Bob, > > > I was there and your uranotype presentation was STELLAR. > > > > > > First of all, the DVD was professionally done, answered all > > > questions, > > and gave all an idea of your darkroom space, your working procedure, > > how careful you are to be mindful of the chemistry, and exactly how > > you make > a > > uranotype. The audience was entranced with your presentation and you > could > > have heard a pin drop. > > > > > > Second, your wonderful and quirky sense of humor made the presentation! > > It was fun to see you in person but also just everything about it > > was tiptop and the shots of where you live, beach scenes, bobbling > > boats, > made > > all of us want to visit you so beware. > > > > > > There were about 40 people at APIS watching your presentation. I > > > had to > > run out and get my dongle from my car for the next presentation so I > missed > > the live streaming/Skype where questions were asked/answered which > > was a bummer but at least I got to see you speak. > > > > > > We all examined your uranotype prints which was also a real boon > > > to > > being there at APIS. > > > > > > So great job and glad to meet you even if only a semi-one-way street! > > > Chris > > > > > >> On Oct 20, 2013, at 5:33 PM, bobkiss @caribsurf.com < > > bobkiss at caribsurf.com> wrote: > > >> > > >> DEAR LIST, > > >> > > >> Did anyone from the list attend APIS this year? I didn't have > enough > > >> time to ask after my video presentation on Uranotypes was show if > anyone > > >> was there from the list. I would have liked to meet and chat a bit. > > >> It looked like a really interesting and diverse set of > presentations. > > >> > > >> CHEERS! > > >> BOB > > >> _______________________________________________ > > >> Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > > _______________________________________________ > > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > > > _______________________________________________ > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > _______________________________________________ Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org From e.camerling at tiscali.nl Tue Oct 22 09:00:06 2013 From: e.camerling at tiscali.nl (Erich Camerling) Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2013 11:00:06 +0200 Subject: [Alt-photo] 365 nm. UV-densitometer. Message-ID: <52663E95.8070604@tiscali.nl> You -do-it-yourself means : 1 : you have to make your own printed circuit boards or you must have a friend who can make them for you. ( our print-drawings you can have via the internet for free at the end of this series of articles) When a specialized company will make the printed circuit boards it will cost you lot of money I suppose. 2 : You have to buy all the components yourself (or have a friend........) ( we will give you a detailed list on internet for free) 3 : Don't start with this DIY project when you don't have sufficient knowledge of electronics e.g.. you cannot "read" (= understand) a wiring diagram and don't have a good small soldering iron and/or never used such an iron for soldering small parts like IC's , resistors , capacitors etc. 4 : The complete paper will contain 7 chapters : 1 : power supply , 2 : electronic "clock factory" , 3 : LED driver , 4 : sensor 5: inversion circuit 6 : other things as : DVM 7 : software 5 : For printing the print-drawings you need a laser printer or an inkjet printer and associated film.I need two identical transparencies on top of each other because the density of one transparency was too low at my inkjet printer to reach a good result. 6 : BEFORE starting the project you MUST have ( and use !!) a pair of spectacles with polycarbonate glasses ( see the reason for that at : www.opticampus.com/tools/transmittance.php : " polycarbonate" spectral transmittance ) to protect your eyes against the tremendous and dangerous amount of UV-light. I bought an "UVEX Hi-res super OGT " pair of glasses ( EUR 20.= ) .When you know another one ( better and/or cheaper ) it is of coarse also okay. Please let me know. 7 : The transparencies are designed by my friend with Eagle V.5.11 prof . You need the FREEWARE version from www.cadsoftusa.com/download-eagle/freeware/ to become the possibility to print the print-drawings , electronic diagrams etc. To be continued next week. PS. I realise there will be a problem because it is not permitted to add attachments ( such as wiring diagrams ) to the e-mail on this site. What will be the best solution for this problem for alt-photo members ? From workshops at polychrome.nl Tue Oct 22 09:50:09 2013 From: workshops at polychrome.nl (Kees Brandenburg) Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2013 11:50:09 +0200 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: 365 nm. UV-densitometer. In-Reply-To: <52663E95.8070604@tiscali.nl> References: <52663E95.8070604@tiscali.nl> Message-ID: <3DD750EC-3404-4284-802B-0AE212D1F6FF@polychrome.nl> On 22 okt. 2013, at 11:00, Erich Camerling wrote: > PS. I realise there will be a problem because it is not permitted to add attachments ( such as wiring diagrams ) to the e-mail on this site. > What will be the best solution for this problem for alt-photo members ? You can use google drive, dropbox or other free cloud services to host them and post the link to the files in your text. But I can also host them for you if you want. Kees From bobkiss at caribsurf.com Tue Oct 22 10:48:44 2013 From: bobkiss at caribsurf.com (bobkiss @caribsurf.com) Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2013 06:48:44 -0400 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: Bob's Uranotype presentation In-Reply-To: <19BFDE1ACA5CA545BA009EE8205ED4A7243067C7@MAIL-MB2.lumcnet.prod.intern> References: <19BFDE1ACA5CA545BA009EE8205ED4A7243067C7@MAIL-MB2.lumcnet.prod.intern> Message-ID: DEAR COL, Yes, I was trying to decide whether to use YouTube or Vimeo. Which do you prefer? CHEERS! BOB On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 3:43 AM, wrote: > Bob, > > I (and many others) were not able to attend your presentation at APIS. > Would it be possible to upload your presentation to the public domain > (YouTube or similar)? > > That would be very nice > > Best, > > Cor > > -----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 > Harlan Chapman > Sent: dinsdag 22 oktober 2013 0:25 > To: alt-photo-process-list at lists.altphotolist.org > Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: ANYONE FROM LIST AT APIS? > > Hello Bob, > Another APIS attendee here. > I heartily agree with Christina's and Jason's comments on your > presentation. > Your video was so well done I felt like I was in your darkroom with you > making the prints. > And thank you for sending your wonderful prints to us to see. > You clearly made a big investment in the presentation for us. The outcome > was well received much appreciated. > Best, > -Harlan > > > On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 4:36 AM, bobkiss @caribsurf.com < > bobkiss at caribsurf.com> wrote: > > > DEAR J JASON, > > Thanks for your for your support! It is good to know that people > > enjoyed and learned from it. > > CHEERS! > > BOB > > > > > > On Sun, Oct 20, 2013 at 11:34 PM, J. Jason Lazarus < > > jason at lucidperceptions.com> wrote: > > > > > I'll second everything that Chris mentioned; I was really focused on > > > your entire presentation and amazed by it - such a wonderfully > > > interesting process that I had no former knowledge of! Thank you so > > > much for your in-depth presentation! > > > > > > J. Jason Lazarus > > > Lucidperceptions.com > > > > > > Sent from my iPhone > > > > > > > On Oct 20, 2013, at 6:51 PM, "Christina Z. Anderson" < > > > christinazanderson at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > Dear Bob, > > > > I was there and your uranotype presentation was STELLAR. > > > > > > > > First of all, the DVD was professionally done, answered all > > > > questions, > > > and gave all an idea of your darkroom space, your working procedure, > > > how careful you are to be mindful of the chemistry, and exactly how > > > you make > > a > > > uranotype. The audience was entranced with your presentation and you > > could > > > have heard a pin drop. > > > > > > > > Second, your wonderful and quirky sense of humor made the > presentation! > > > It was fun to see you in person but also just everything about it > > > was tiptop and the shots of where you live, beach scenes, bobbling > > > boats, > > made > > > all of us want to visit you so beware. > > > > > > > > There were about 40 people at APIS watching your presentation. I > > > > had to > > > run out and get my dongle from my car for the next presentation so I > > missed > > > the live streaming/Skype where questions were asked/answered which > > > was a bummer but at least I got to see you speak. > > > > > > > > We all examined your uranotype prints which was also a real boon > > > > to > > > being there at APIS. > > > > > > > > So great job and glad to meet you even if only a semi-one-way street! > > > > Chris > > > > > > > >> On Oct 20, 2013, at 5:33 PM, bobkiss @caribsurf.com < > > > bobkiss at caribsurf.com> wrote: > > > >> > > > >> DEAR LIST, > > > >> > > > >> Did anyone from the list attend APIS this year? I didn't have > > enough > > > >> time to ask after my video presentation on Uranotypes was show if > > anyone > > > >> was there from the list. I would have liked to meet and chat a bit. > > > >> It looked like a really interesting and diverse set of > > presentations. > > > >> > > > >> CHEERS! > > > >> BOB > > > >> _______________________________________________ > > > >> Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > > > _______________________________________________ > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > _______________________________________________ > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > From C.Breukel at lumc.nl Tue Oct 22 10:58:52 2013 From: C.Breukel at lumc.nl (C.Breukel at lumc.nl) Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2013 10:58:52 +0000 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: Bob's Uranotype presentation In-Reply-To: References: <19BFDE1ACA5CA545BA009EE8205ED4A7243067C7@MAIL-MB2.lumcnet.prod.intern> Message-ID: <19BFDE1ACA5CA545BA009EE8205ED4A724306815@MAIL-MB2.lumcnet.prod.intern> Wonderful ! I have no preference, no experience with uploading video, YouTube seems ok, but perhaps others have a better opinion ? Thanks, Best, Cor -----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 bobkiss @caribsurf.com Sent: dinsdag 22 oktober 2013 12:49 To: alt-photo-process-list at lists.altphotolist.org Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: Bob's Uranotype presentation DEAR COL, Yes, I was trying to decide whether to use YouTube or Vimeo. Which do you prefer? CHEERS! BOB On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 3:43 AM, wrote: > Bob, > > I (and many others) were not able to attend your presentation at APIS. > Would it be possible to upload your presentation to the public domain > (YouTube or similar)? > > That would be very nice > > Best, > > Cor > > -----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 > Harlan Chapman > Sent: dinsdag 22 oktober 2013 0:25 > To: alt-photo-process-list at lists.altphotolist.org > Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: ANYONE FROM LIST AT APIS? > > Hello Bob, > Another APIS attendee here. > I heartily agree with Christina's and Jason's comments on your > presentation. > Your video was so well done I felt like I was in your darkroom with > you making the prints. > And thank you for sending your wonderful prints to us to see. > You clearly made a big investment in the presentation for us. The > outcome was well received much appreciated. > Best, > -Harlan > > > On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 4:36 AM, bobkiss @caribsurf.com < > bobkiss at caribsurf.com> wrote: > > > DEAR J JASON, > > Thanks for your for your support! It is good to know that > > people enjoyed and learned from it. > > CHEERS! > > BOB > > > > > > On Sun, Oct 20, 2013 at 11:34 PM, J. Jason Lazarus < > > jason at lucidperceptions.com> wrote: > > > > > I'll second everything that Chris mentioned; I was really focused > > > on your entire presentation and amazed by it - such a wonderfully > > > interesting process that I had no former knowledge of! Thank you > > > so much for your in-depth presentation! > > > > > > J. Jason Lazarus > > > Lucidperceptions.com > > > > > > Sent from my iPhone > > > > > > > On Oct 20, 2013, at 6:51 PM, "Christina Z. Anderson" < > > > christinazanderson at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > Dear Bob, > > > > I was there and your uranotype presentation was STELLAR. > > > > > > > > First of all, the DVD was professionally done, answered all > > > > questions, > > > and gave all an idea of your darkroom space, your working > > > procedure, how careful you are to be mindful of the chemistry, and > > > exactly how you make > > a > > > uranotype. The audience was entranced with your presentation and > > > you > > could > > > have heard a pin drop. > > > > > > > > Second, your wonderful and quirky sense of humor made the > presentation! > > > It was fun to see you in person but also just everything about it > > > was tiptop and the shots of where you live, beach scenes, bobbling > > > boats, > > made > > > all of us want to visit you so beware. > > > > > > > > There were about 40 people at APIS watching your presentation. I > > > > had to > > > run out and get my dongle from my car for the next presentation so > > > I > > missed > > > the live streaming/Skype where questions were asked/answered which > > > was a bummer but at least I got to see you speak. > > > > > > > > We all examined your uranotype prints which was also a real boon > > > > to > > > being there at APIS. > > > > > > > > So great job and glad to meet you even if only a semi-one-way street! > > > > Chris > > > > > > > >> On Oct 20, 2013, at 5:33 PM, bobkiss @caribsurf.com < > > > bobkiss at caribsurf.com> wrote: > > > >> > > > >> DEAR LIST, > > > >> > > > >> Did anyone from the list attend APIS this year? I didn't > > > >> have > > enough > > > >> time to ask after my video presentation on Uranotypes was show > > > >> if > > anyone > > > >> was there from the list. I would have liked to meet and chat a bit. > > > >> It looked like a really interesting and diverse set of > > presentations. > > > >> > > > >> CHEERS! > > > >> BOB > > > >> _______________________________________________ > > > >> Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > > > _______________________________________________ > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > _______________________________________________ > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > _______________________________________________ Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org From emanphoto at gmail.com Tue Oct 22 13:49:29 2013 From: emanphoto at gmail.com (Eric Nelson) Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2013 20:49:29 +0700 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: Bob's Uranotype presentation In-Reply-To: <19BFDE1ACA5CA545BA009EE8205ED4A724306815@MAIL-MB2.lumcnet.prod.intern> References: <19BFDE1ACA5CA545BA009EE8205ED4A7243067C7@MAIL-MB2.lumcnet.prod.intern> <19BFDE1ACA5CA545BA009EE8205ED4A724306815@MAIL-MB2.lumcnet.prod.intern> Message-ID: In my experience, Vimeo allows for better quality videos, but that might be a function of number of amateur submissions I see on youtube. Vimeo seems more professionally orientated. Each should be equally capable of hosting the video. e On Oct 22, 2013, at 5:58 PM, wrote: > Wonderful ! I have no preference, no experience with uploading video, YouTube seems ok, but perhaps others have a better opinion ? > > Thanks, > > Best, > > Cor > > -----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 bobkiss @caribsurf.com > Sent: dinsdag 22 oktober 2013 12:49 > To: alt-photo-process-list at lists.altphotolist.org > Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: Bob's Uranotype presentation > > DEAR COL, > Yes, I was trying to decide whether to use YouTube or Vimeo. Which do you prefer? > CHEERS! > BOB > > > On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 3:43 AM, wrote: > >> Bob, >> >> I (and many others) were not able to attend your presentation at APIS. >> Would it be possible to upload your presentation to the public domain >> (YouTube or similar)? >> >> That would be very nice >> >> Best, >> >> Cor >> >> -----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 >> Harlan Chapman >> Sent: dinsdag 22 oktober 2013 0:25 >> To: alt-photo-process-list at lists.altphotolist.org >> Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: ANYONE FROM LIST AT APIS? >> >> Hello Bob, >> Another APIS attendee here. >> I heartily agree with Christina's and Jason's comments on your >> presentation. >> Your video was so well done I felt like I was in your darkroom with >> you making the prints. >> And thank you for sending your wonderful prints to us to see. >> You clearly made a big investment in the presentation for us. The >> outcome was well received much appreciated. >> Best, >> -Harlan >> >> >> On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 4:36 AM, bobkiss @caribsurf.com < >> bobkiss at caribsurf.com> wrote: >> >>> DEAR J JASON, >>> Thanks for your for your support! It is good to know that >>> people enjoyed and learned from it. >>> CHEERS! >>> BOB >>> >>> >>> On Sun, Oct 20, 2013 at 11:34 PM, J. Jason Lazarus < >>> jason at lucidperceptions.com> wrote: >>> >>>> I'll second everything that Chris mentioned; I was really focused >>>> on your entire presentation and amazed by it - such a wonderfully >>>> interesting process that I had no former knowledge of! Thank you >>>> so much for your in-depth presentation! >>>> >>>> J. Jason Lazarus >>>> Lucidperceptions.com >>>> >>>> Sent from my iPhone >>>> >>>>> On Oct 20, 2013, at 6:51 PM, "Christina Z. Anderson" < >>>> christinazanderson at gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Dear Bob, >>>>> I was there and your uranotype presentation was STELLAR. >>>>> >>>>> First of all, the DVD was professionally done, answered all >>>>> questions, >>>> and gave all an idea of your darkroom space, your working >>>> procedure, how careful you are to be mindful of the chemistry, and >>>> exactly how you make >>> a >>>> uranotype. The audience was entranced with your presentation and >>>> you >>> could >>>> have heard a pin drop. >>>>> >>>>> Second, your wonderful and quirky sense of humor made the >> presentation! >>>> It was fun to see you in person but also just everything about it >>>> was tiptop and the shots of where you live, beach scenes, bobbling >>>> boats, >>> made >>>> all of us want to visit you so beware. >>>>> >>>>> There were about 40 people at APIS watching your presentation. I >>>>> had to >>>> run out and get my dongle from my car for the next presentation so >>>> I >>> missed >>>> the live streaming/Skype where questions were asked/answered which >>>> was a bummer but at least I got to see you speak. >>>>> >>>>> We all examined your uranotype prints which was also a real boon >>>>> to >>>> being there at APIS. >>>>> >>>>> So great job and glad to meet you even if only a semi-one-way street! >>>>> Chris >>>>> >>>>>> On Oct 20, 2013, at 5:33 PM, bobkiss @caribsurf.com < >>>> bobkiss at caribsurf.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> DEAR LIST, >>>>>> >>>>>> Did anyone from the list attend APIS this year? I didn't >>>>>> have >>> enough >>>>>> time to ask after my video presentation on Uranotypes was show >>>>>> if >>> anyone >>>>>> was there from the list. I would have liked to meet and chat a bit. >>>>>> It looked like a really interesting and diverse set of >>> presentations. >>>>>> >>>>>> CHEERS! >>>>>> BOB >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org >> _______________________________________________ >> Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org >> _______________________________________________ >> Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > _______________________________________________ > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > _______________________________________________ > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org From aschmitt at aandy.org Tue Oct 22 14:03:05 2013 From: aschmitt at aandy.org (andy schmitt) Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2013 10:03:05 -0400 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: 365 nm. UV-densitometer. In-Reply-To: <52663E95.8070604@tiscali.nl> References: <52663E95.8070604@tiscali.nl> Message-ID: <077c01cecf2f$6f2d10c0$4d873240$@aandy.org> Erich... I so look forward to a good do-it-yourself'er ... especially in the winter... maybe I can build a new box for my department at Peters Valley School for Craft... thanks! Regards andy -----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 Erich Camerling Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2013 5:00 AM To: Alt Photo Subject: [Alt-photo] 365 nm. UV-densitometer. You -do-it-yourself means : 1 : you have to make your own printed circuit boards or you must have a friend who can make them for you. ( our print-drawings you can have via the internet for free at the end of this series of articles) When a specialized company will make the printed circuit boards it will cost you lot of money I suppose. 2 : You have to buy all the components yourself (or have a friend........) ( we will give you a detailed list on internet for free) 3 : Don't start with this DIY project when you don't have sufficient knowledge of electronics e.g.. you cannot "read" (= understand) a wiring diagram and don't have a good small soldering iron and/or never used such an iron for soldering small parts like IC's , resistors , capacitors etc. 4 : The complete paper will contain 7 chapters : 1 : power supply , 2 : electronic "clock factory" , 3 : LED driver , 4 : sensor 5: inversion circuit 6 : other things as : DVM 7 : software 5 : For printing the print-drawings you need a laser printer or an inkjet printer and associated film.I need two identical transparencies on top of each other because the density of one transparency was too low at my inkjet printer to reach a good result. 6 : BEFORE starting the project you MUST have ( and use !!) a pair of spectacles with polycarbonate glasses ( see the reason for that at : www.opticampus.com/tools/transmittance.php : " polycarbonate" spectral transmittance ) to protect your eyes against the tremendous and dangerous amount of UV-light. I bought an "UVEX Hi-res super OGT " pair of glasses ( EUR 20.= ) .When you know another one ( better and/or cheaper ) it is of coarse also okay. Please let me know. 7 : The transparencies are designed by my friend with Eagle V.5.11 prof . You need the FREEWARE version from www.cadsoftusa.com/download-eagle/freeware/ to become the possibility to print the print-drawings , electronic diagrams etc. To be continued next week. PS. I realise there will be a problem because it is not permitted to add attachments ( such as wiring diagrams ) to the e-mail on this site. What will be the best solution for this problem for alt-photo members ? _______________________________________________ Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org From laura at lavatop.com Wed Oct 23 01:38:58 2013 From: laura at lavatop.com (Laura V) Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2013 01:38:58 +0000 Subject: [Alt-photo] 1st attempt Message-ID: <526728B2.9060807@lavatop.com> Actually, it's the 2nd attempt, the first one peeled right off the paper and washed away. It felt like the gum was thicker and stickier than I remembered using before, it was like honey, so I thinned it out to more of the consistency of maple syrup. I also increased the exposure a bit for good measure. This stuck to the paper much better, and the exposure seems right, but you can see there is still some peeling at the top in the sky. Has anyone had this problem? How do you like your gum mixture, thick or thin? The other problem I'm having is that the light source (my mercury vapor bulb that I put inside the vacuum press) is much closer to the glass that I had hoped...it is only about 20 cm away. So I guess that explains why the image gets whiter on the sides. I'll have to figure something out with the lighting. http://lauraval.com/mountain.jpg Laura From jack at jackbrubaker.com Wed Oct 23 02:16:30 2013 From: jack at jackbrubaker.com (Jack Brubaker) Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2013 22:16:30 -0400 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: 1st attempt In-Reply-To: <526728B2.9060807@lavatop.com> References: <526728B2.9060807@lavatop.com> Message-ID: Laura, That is a very good beginning for someone working by your self. If you want to have the effect of a personal tutor with huge knowledge of gum get Chris Anderson's book on gum. It is the ultimate resource. There are many variables in gum. Changing one of them will effect all the others. So while it looks like your exposure was a bit short so that the gum is sloughing off in spots that may be more likely from too thick a coating. Gum is most controllable in thin coats with multiple layers used to build deep tones. A thin coat will be better bonded to the paper (the exposure will penetrate to the paper), and can withstand a longer development that will help clear whites and allow physical development if needed. It is most helpful when showing a print that you have questions about to tell what your mix is of gum, water, and color, what your exposure is, and how long it developed, and whether by just floating on the water or with physical intervention. You will be more likely to get a meaningful response on you problems with that kind of info. It is too bad the gum layer broke down some on the sky because this is really a very good example of a one coat print. Most gum printers only work in multi layers to avoid the problem you see in your print. With a one coat print it is often customary to get either a break down in the dark tones like you got, or if the exposure is long enough to lock in the dark tones the whites wont' clear. Welcome to the addiction of the ever elusive perfect gum print, Jack On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 9:38 PM, Laura V wrote: > Actually, it's the 2nd attempt, the first one peeled right off the paper > and washed away. It felt like the gum was thicker and stickier than I > remembered using before, it was like honey, so I thinned it out to more of > the consistency of maple syrup. I also increased the exposure a bit for > good measure. This stuck to the paper much better, and the exposure seems > right, but you can see there is still some peeling at the top in the sky. > Has anyone had this problem? How do you like your gum mixture, thick or > thin? > > The other problem I'm having is that the light source (my mercury vapor > bulb that I put inside the vacuum press) is much closer to the glass that I > had hoped...it is only about 20 cm away. So I guess that explains why the > image gets whiter on the sides. I'll have to figure something out with the > lighting. > > http://lauraval.com/mountain.**jpg > > Laura > ______________________________**_________________ > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > From laura at lavatop.com Wed Oct 23 12:36:19 2013 From: laura at lavatop.com (Laura V) Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2013 12:36:19 +0000 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: 1st attempt In-Reply-To: References: <526728B2.9060807@lavatop.com> Message-ID: <5267C2C3.7090606@lavatop.com> On 10/23/13 2:16 AM, Jack Brubaker wrote: > Laura, > > That is a very good beginning for someone working by your self. Thanks...you might have missed my re-introduction though. This is not my "1st" print, but my first after a 4 year break, and a few of the variables have changed (new gum, different light, etc) so it all feels different. > A thin coat will be better bonded to the paper (the > exposure will penetrate to the paper), and can withstand a longer > development that will help clear whites and allow physical development if > needed. This is what I thought, but I'm not sure if this means I should thin out my mixture, or just apply it more forcefully and spread it out better. I mixed my gum myself from lumps without weighing (because I did it before I got help here on how to do it) and it feels thicker than what I used before, so maybe it just needs more water. > > It is most helpful when showing a print that you have questions about to > tell what your mix is of gum, water, and color, what your exposure is, and > how long it developed, and whether by just floating on the water or with > physical intervention. Gum and dichromate one to one; one teaspoon each with a blob of color (about 1cm) which is what worked before. 4 min exposure. Developed for 20-30 mins face down in cold water, gently agitating the tray a few times and flipping it over to see how it was coming along. > Most gum printers only > work in multi layers to avoid the problem you see in your print. Oh yes, I intend to do 2 or 3 layers. > > Welcome to the addiction of the ever elusive perfect gum print, Heh, yeah it's crazy isn't it? Like learning Icelandic. > > > On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 9:38 PM, Laura V wrote: > >> Actually, it's the 2nd attempt, the first one peeled right off the paper >> and washed away. It felt like the gum was thicker and stickier than I >> remembered using before, it was like honey, so I thinned it out to more of >> the consistency of maple syrup. I also increased the exposure a bit for >> good measure. This stuck to the paper much better, and the exposure seems >> right, but you can see there is still some peeling at the top in the sky. >> Has anyone had this problem? How do you like your gum mixture, thick or >> thin? >> >> The other problem I'm having is that the light source (my mercury vapor >> bulb that I put inside the vacuum press) is much closer to the glass that I >> had hoped...it is only about 20 cm away. So I guess that explains why the >> image gets whiter on the sides. I'll have to figure something out with the >> lighting. >> >> http://lauraval.com/mountain.**jpg >> >> Laura >> ______________________________**_________________ >> Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org >> > _______________________________________________ > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > > From laura at lavatop.com Wed Oct 23 12:42:16 2013 From: laura at lavatop.com (Laura V) Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2013 12:42:16 +0000 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: ANYONE FROM LIST AT APIS? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5267C428.8010502@lavatop.com> Can someone enlighten me...what is APIS? Google doesn't know. I look forward to seeing your presentation on Uranotypes - something else I know nothing about! Laura From darkroommanager at cornell.edu Wed Oct 23 12:51:06 2013 From: darkroommanager at cornell.edu (Darkrooms, Department of Art) Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2013 12:51:06 +0000 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: ANYONE FROM LIST AT APIS? In-Reply-To: <5267C428.8010502@lavatop.com> Message-ID: Laura, APIS is the Alternative Photographic International Symposium by Bostick and Sulivan. http://www.bostick-sullivan.com/cart/product.php?productid=1201&cat=429&pag e=1 Best, Jennifer M. Gioffre Teaching Support Specialist Architecture Art and Planning Cornell University 120 Tjaden Hall Ithaca, NY 14853 o: 607-255-4207 f: 607-255-3462 Jmg393 at cornell.edu Darkroommanager at cornell.edu AAPstore at cornell.edu On 10/23/13 8:42 AM, "Laura V" wrote: >Can someone enlighten me...what is APIS? Google doesn't know. > >I look forward to seeing your presentation on Uranotypes - something >else I know nothing about! > >Laura >_______________________________________________ >Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > From bobkiss at caribsurf.com Wed Oct 23 13:45:00 2013 From: bobkiss at caribsurf.com (BOB KISS) Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2013 09:45:00 -0400 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: ANYONE FROM LIST AT APIS? In-Reply-To: <5267C428.8010502@lavatop.com> References: <5267C428.8010502@lavatop.com> Message-ID: DEAR LAURA, Please forgive my silly sense of humor. Uranotypes are made from Uranyl Nitrate. The meaning and pronunciation of APIS depends on how you pronounce Uranyl! LOL!!! CHEERS! BOB _____ From: alt-photo-process-list-bounces at lists.altphotolist.org [mailto:alt-photo-process-list-bounces at lists.altphotolist.org] On Behalf Of Laura V Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2013 8:42 AM To: alt-photo-process-list at lists.altphotolist.org Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: ANYONE FROM LIST AT APIS? Can someone enlighten me...what is APIS? Google doesn't know. I look forward to seeing your presentation on Uranotypes - something else I know nothing about! Laura _______________________________________________ Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 8954 (20131023) __________ The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. http://www.eset.com __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 8954 (20131023) __________ The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. http://www.eset.com From jack at jackbrubaker.com Wed Oct 23 14:15:31 2013 From: jack at jackbrubaker.com (Jack Brubaker) Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2013 10:15:31 -0400 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: 1st attempt In-Reply-To: <5267C2C3.7090606@lavatop.com> References: <526728B2.9060807@lavatop.com> <5267C2C3.7090606@lavatop.com> Message-ID: You will find it interesting (if you haven't already done so) to search the archives of this list on the subject of gum. One of the striking things is that many people are making fine prints with very different methods. Your method is working but I think you want to fine tune it. If so, while others can share their preferred methods, you may get fine results by just tinkering. If I had made your print, I would think about using a thinner coat with less pigment. Experiment and keep notes. Many printers are now using less dichromate with good results while saving an expensive material and having a less toxic process. Again Chris Anderson's book "Gum Printing and other amazing contact printing processes" is the encyclopedia of current and historical knowledge. It is available at: http://www.alternativephotography.com/wp/ Jack On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 8:36 AM, Laura V wrote: > On 10/23/13 2:16 AM, Jack Brubaker wrote: > >> Laura, >> >> That is a very good beginning for someone working by your self. >> > Thanks...you might have missed my re-introduction though. This is not my > "1st" print, but my first after a 4 year break, and a few of the variables > have changed (new gum, different light, etc) so it all feels different. > > A thin coat will be better bonded to the paper (the >> exposure will penetrate to the paper), and can withstand a longer >> development that will help clear whites and allow physical development if >> needed. >> > This is what I thought, but I'm not sure if this means I should thin out > my mixture, or just apply it more forcefully and spread it out better. I > mixed my gum myself from lumps without weighing (because I did it before I > got help here on how to do it) and it feels thicker than what I used > before, so maybe it just needs more water. > > >> It is most helpful when showing a print that you have questions about to >> tell what your mix is of gum, water, and color, what your exposure is, and >> how long it developed, and whether by just floating on the water or with >> physical intervention. >> > Gum and dichromate one to one; one teaspoon each with a blob of color > (about 1cm) which is what worked before. 4 min exposure. Developed for > 20-30 mins face down in cold water, gently agitating the tray a few times > and flipping it over to see how it was coming along. > > Most gum printers only >> work in multi layers to avoid the problem you see in your print. >> > Oh yes, I intend to do 2 or 3 layers. > > >> Welcome to the addiction of the ever elusive perfect gum print, >> > Heh, yeah it's crazy isn't it? Like learning Icelandic. > >> >> >> On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 9:38 PM, Laura V wrote: >> >> Actually, it's the 2nd attempt, the first one peeled right off the paper >>> and washed away. It felt like the gum was thicker and stickier than I >>> remembered using before, it was like honey, so I thinned it out to more >>> of >>> the consistency of maple syrup. I also increased the exposure a bit for >>> good measure. This stuck to the paper much better, and the exposure seems >>> right, but you can see there is still some peeling at the top in the sky. >>> Has anyone had this problem? How do you like your gum mixture, thick or >>> thin? >>> >>> The other problem I'm having is that the light source (my mercury vapor >>> bulb that I put inside the vacuum press) is much closer to the glass >>> that I >>> had hoped...it is only about 20 cm away. So I guess that explains why the >>> image gets whiter on the sides. I'll have to figure something out with >>> the >>> lighting. >>> >>> http://lauraval.com/mountain.****jpg< >>> http://lauraval.com/mountain.**jpg > >>> >>> Laura >>> ______________________________****_________________ >>> Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org >>> >>> ______________________________**_________________ >> Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org >> >> >> > ______________________________**_________________ > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > From dlhbloomfield at gmail.com Wed Oct 23 15:12:06 2013 From: dlhbloomfield at gmail.com (Diana Bloomfield) Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2013 11:12:06 -0400 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: 1st attempt In-Reply-To: References: <526728B2.9060807@lavatop.com> <5267C2C3.7090606@lavatop.com> Message-ID: I agree with Jack about Chris's book. I think you'd find it really helpful. I also agree about the pigment suggestion. One issue I consistently see with the people I've taught is the desire to add more pigment than is necessary, which causes all kinds of problems-- and it's frustrating for them. My suggestion is to always start with less pigment. In fact, when I first started making gum prints, I ultimately started making very light prints (not much pigment and the gum and dichromate adjusted accordingly), and what a difference. I found that I could go back over everything again with a second thin coat, for a richer print. Eventually, just by printing-- I understood how much pigment I could initially use without having problems. The blue pigment is also often a problem for people-- not sure why-- but I also sometimes suggest using Payne's Gray instead of, say, Prussian Blue. For some reason-- though it's very light and soft-- it works well, and it shows people that they can do this process and leaves them less frustrated about the whole thing and more willing to move forward. As an aside, I have been trying Chia's methods she described here some time ago. I had to ultimately get a new printer, so that slowed me down-- but what I love is using the graphite pigment. I had a graphite powder which works well, but also a tube pigment. I really like the tone that it offers-- totally different from just CMY. But the biggest news-- which I forgot to post-- is that my birthday did roll around, as predicted, back in August-- and all my prints from the Oregon show arrived back here. They sat in crates on the living room floor for forever until I finally opened them. And in one of them sat that gorgeous white tulip gum print of Chia's that she'd shown out there. My husband did get that for me-- and he never said a word, even when the crates sat here gathering dust, unopened. So it was a big surprise when I finally opened them and saw that print sitting there. It is so beautiful and, really, so unusual. And it's perfect here in my house as I knew it would be. :) So if you're listening-- thanks, Chia. I could not be happier getting to look at this incredible print-- everyday. Diana On Oct 23, 2013, at 10:15 AM, Jack Brubaker wrote: > You will find it interesting (if you haven't already done so) to search the > archives of this list on the subject of gum. One of the striking things is > that many people are making fine prints with very different methods. Your > method is working but I think you want to fine tune it. If so, while others > can share their preferred methods, you may get fine results by just > tinkering. If I had made your print, I would think about using a thinner > coat with less pigment. Experiment and keep notes. Many printers are now > using less dichromate with good results while saving an expensive material > and having a less toxic process. Again Chris Anderson's book "Gum Printing > and other amazing contact printing processes" is the encyclopedia of > current and historical knowledge. It is available at: > http://www.alternativephotography.com/wp/ > > Jack > > From laura at lavatop.com Thu Oct 24 10:36:36 2013 From: laura at lavatop.com (Laura V) Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2013 10:36:36 +0000 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: ANYONE FROM LIST AT APIS? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5268F834.4090109@lavatop.com> Thanks for the explanation Jennifer. Bob, any kind of humor is fine with me! Laura From laura at lavatop.com Thu Oct 24 10:52:07 2013 From: laura at lavatop.com (Laura V) Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2013 10:52:07 +0000 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: 1st attempt In-Reply-To: References: <526728B2.9060807@lavatop.com> <5267C2C3.7090606@lavatop.com> Message-ID: <5268FBD7.1080500@lavatop.com> Ah, so by "thinner" you mean less pigment. I'll try that. I've read that less dichromate can give a less contrasty print...so I might try that too later, right now I just want to get up to the level where I was before. Thanks for reminding me about the book...if I remember correctly, that edition was coming out right about the time I abruptly quit printing. I'll definitely check it out. I do remember Christina's very helpful posts to the list over the years. Laura On 10/23/13 2:15 PM, Jack Brubaker wrote: > You will find it interesting (if you haven't already done so) to search the > archives of this list on the subject of gum. One of the striking things is > that many people are making fine prints with very different methods. Your > method is working but I think you want to fine tune it. If so, while others > can share their preferred methods, you may get fine results by just > tinkering. If I had made your print, I would think about using a thinner > coat with less pigment. Experiment and keep notes. Many printers are now > using less dichromate with good results while saving an expensive material > and having a less toxic process. Again Chris Anderson's book "Gum Printing > and other amazing contact printing processes" is the encyclopedia of > current and historical knowledge. It is available at: > http://www.alternativephotography.com/wp/ > > Jack > > > On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 8:36 AM, Laura V wrote: > >> On 10/23/13 2:16 AM, Jack Brubaker wrote: >> >>> Laura, >>> >>> That is a very good beginning for someone working by your self. >>> >> Thanks...you might have missed my re-introduction though. This is not my >> "1st" print, but my first after a 4 year break, and a few of the variables >> have changed (new gum, different light, etc) so it all feels different. >> >> A thin coat will be better bonded to the paper (the >>> exposure will penetrate to the paper), and can withstand a longer >>> development that will help clear whites and allow physical development if >>> needed. >>> >> This is what I thought, but I'm not sure if this means I should thin out >> my mixture, or just apply it more forcefully and spread it out better. I >> mixed my gum myself from lumps without weighing (because I did it before I >> got help here on how to do it) and it feels thicker than what I used >> before, so maybe it just needs more water. >> >> >>> It is most helpful when showing a print that you have questions about to >>> tell what your mix is of gum, water, and color, what your exposure is, and >>> how long it developed, and whether by just floating on the water or with >>> physical intervention. >>> >> Gum and dichromate one to one; one teaspoon each with a blob of color >> (about 1cm) which is what worked before. 4 min exposure. Developed for >> 20-30 mins face down in cold water, gently agitating the tray a few times >> and flipping it over to see how it was coming along. >> >> Most gum printers only >>> work in multi layers to avoid the problem you see in your print. >>> >> Oh yes, I intend to do 2 or 3 layers. >> >> >>> Welcome to the addiction of the ever elusive perfect gum print, >>> >> Heh, yeah it's crazy isn't it? Like learning Icelandic. >> >>> >>> On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 9:38 PM, Laura V wrote: >>> >>> Actually, it's the 2nd attempt, the first one peeled right off the paper >>>> and washed away. It felt like the gum was thicker and stickier than I >>>> remembered using before, it was like honey, so I thinned it out to more >>>> of >>>> the consistency of maple syrup. I also increased the exposure a bit for >>>> good measure. This stuck to the paper much better, and the exposure seems >>>> right, but you can see there is still some peeling at the top in the sky. >>>> Has anyone had this problem? How do you like your gum mixture, thick or >>>> thin? >>>> >>>> The other problem I'm having is that the light source (my mercury vapor >>>> bulb that I put inside the vacuum press) is much closer to the glass >>>> that I >>>> had hoped...it is only about 20 cm away. So I guess that explains why the >>>> image gets whiter on the sides. I'll have to figure something out with >>>> the >>>> lighting. >>>> >>>> http://lauraval.com/mountain.****jpg< >>>> http://lauraval.com/mountain.**jpg > >>>> >>>> Laura >>>> ______________________________****_________________ >>>> Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org >>>> >>>> ______________________________**_________________ >>> Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org >>> >>> >>> >> ______________________________**_________________ >> Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org >> > _______________________________________________ > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > > From bobkiss at caribsurf.com Thu Oct 24 11:01:55 2013 From: bobkiss at caribsurf.com (bobkiss @caribsurf.com) Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2013 07:01:55 -0400 Subject: [Alt-photo] URANOTYPE YOUTUBE URL Message-ID: DEAR LIST, This is for those who asked to see the video I did for APIS on Uranotypes. Here is the URL: http://youtu.be/AeDK6byP2tk It is 52 minutes long! CHEERS! BOB From laura at lavatop.com Thu Oct 24 11:11:04 2013 From: laura at lavatop.com (Laura V) Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2013 11:11:04 +0000 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: 1st attempt In-Reply-To: References: <526728B2.9060807@lavatop.com> <5267C2C3.7090606@lavatop.com> Message-ID: <52690048.60807@lavatop.com> Thanks Diana for your input. I think maybe I did go a little heavy on the pigment. I did use the Payne's Gray to start with (that image I posted was taken with a old phone camera so it's probably not that accurate) and I do remember having staining problems with blues like Pthaylo and Prussian, so perhaps the mix will help that. I'll have to search for Chia's posts in the archives. I had the pleasure of visiting her at her studio when I visited Gothenburg in 2007. It was the first time I had seen a gum print in person and I was so grateful for that opportunity. At the time, I was unsure whether gum was the process for me, but after seeing her work I was so inspired. I have a tiny print of hers on my wall, just a simple vase with a flower, but it has - something - I love it! Laura On 10/23/13 3:12 PM, Diana Bloomfield wrote: > I agree with Jack about Chris's book. I think you'd find it really > helpful. > > I also agree about the pigment suggestion. One issue I consistently > see with the people I've taught is the desire to add more pigment > than is necessary, which causes all kinds of problems-- and it's > frustrating for them. My suggestion is to always start with less > pigment. In fact, when I first started making gum prints, I > ultimately started making very light prints (not much pigment and the > gum and dichromate adjusted accordingly), and what a difference. I > found that I could go back over everything again with a second thin > coat, for a richer print. Eventually, just by printing-- I > understood how much pigment I could initially use without having > problems. The blue pigment is also often a problem for people-- not > sure why-- but I also sometimes suggest using Payne's Gray instead > of, say, Prussian Blue. For some reason-- though it's very light and > soft-- it works well, and it shows people that they can do this > process and leaves them less frustrated about the whole thing and > more willing to move forward. > > As an aside, I have been trying Chia's methods she described here > some time ago. I had to ultimately get a new printer, so that slowed > me down-- but what I love is using the graphite pigment. I had a > graphite powder which works well, but also a tube pigment. I really > like the tone that it offers-- totally different from just CMY. But > the biggest news-- which I forgot to post-- is that my birthday did > roll around, as predicted, back in August-- and all my prints from > the Oregon show arrived back here. They sat in crates on the living > room floor for forever until I finally opened them. And in one of > them sat that gorgeous white tulip gum print of Chia's that she'd > shown out there. My husband did get that for me-- and he never said > a word, even when the crates sat here gathering dust, unopened. So > it was a big surprise when I finally opened them and saw that print > sitting there. It is so beautiful and, really, so unusual. And it's > perfect here in my house as I knew it would be. :) So if you're > listening-- thanks, Chia. I could not be happier getting to look at > this incredible print-- everyday. > > Diana > > On Oct 23, 2013, at 10:15 AM, Jack Brubaker wrote: > >> You will find it interesting (if you haven't already done so) to >> search the archives of this list on the subject of gum. One of the >> striking things is that many people are making fine prints with >> very different methods. Your method is working but I think you want >> to fine tune it. If so, while others can share their preferred >> methods, you may get fine results by just tinkering. If I had made >> your print, I would think about using a thinner coat with less >> pigment. Experiment and keep notes. Many printers are now using >> less dichromate with good results while saving an expensive >> material and having a less toxic process. Again Chris Anderson's >> book "Gum Printing and other amazing contact printing processes" is >> the encyclopedia of current and historical knowledge. It is >> available at: http://www.alternativephotography.com/wp/ >> >> Jack >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > > From ravene at gmail.com Thu Oct 24 12:09:49 2013 From: ravene at gmail.com (raven erebus) Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2013 05:09:49 -0700 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: URANOTYPE YOUTUBE URL In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: It says the video is private. On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 4:01 AM, bobkiss @caribsurf.com < bobkiss at caribsurf.com> wrote: > DEAR LIST, > This is for those who asked to see the video I did for APIS on > Uranotypes. Here is the URL: http://youtu.be/AeDK6byP2tk > It is 52 minutes long! > CHEERS! > BOB > _______________________________________________ > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > -- ?Be regular and orderly in your life, so that you may be violent and original in your work.? Gustave Flaubert From bobkiss at caribsurf.com Thu Oct 24 12:26:03 2013 From: bobkiss at caribsurf.com (bobkiss @caribsurf.com) Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2013 08:26:03 -0400 Subject: [Alt-photo] test, pse disregard. Message-ID: Seeing if my own posts show up in my e-mail inbox. From donsbryant at gmail.com Thu Oct 24 12:51:23 2013 From: donsbryant at gmail.com (Don Bryant) Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2013 08:51:23 -0400 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: URANOTYPE YOUTUBE URL In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Bob, You need to make this video Public. As is, YouTube prevents viewing because it is marked Private. Don Bryant On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 7:01 AM, bobkiss @caribsurf.com < bobkiss at caribsurf.com> wrote: > DEAR LIST, > This is for those who asked to see the video I did for APIS on > Uranotypes. Here is the URL: http://youtu.be/AeDK6byP2tk > It is 52 minutes long! > CHEERS! > BOB > _______________________________________________ > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > From chansonette at gmail.com Thu Oct 24 12:53:49 2013 From: chansonette at gmail.com (Anne Eder) Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2013 08:53:49 -0400 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: URANOTYPE YOUTUBE URL In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <9B5E8527-66A0-487B-AA2B-038265CC4B76@gmail.com> I tried but was unable to view from this URL - it said it was private? Would like to see it! Anne Sent from my iPhone > On Oct 24, 2013, at 7:01 AM, "bobkiss @caribsurf.com" wrote: > > DEAR LIST, > This is for those who asked to see the video I did for APIS on > Uranotypes. Here is the URL: http://youtu.be/AeDK6byP2tk > It is 52 minutes long! > CHEERS! > BOB > _______________________________________________ > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org From fotodave at dsoemarko.us Thu Oct 24 13:33:21 2013 From: fotodave at dsoemarko.us (Dave S) Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2013 09:33:21 -0400 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: 1st attempt In-Reply-To: <5268FBD7.1080500@lavatop.com> References: <526728B2.9060807@lavatop.com> <5267C2C3.7090606@lavatop.com> <5268FBD7.1080500@lavatop.com> Message-ID: <002401ced0bd$9bc9e7e0$d35db7a0$@dsoemarko.us> Hi Laura, less dichromate will give a *more* contrasty print because the scale will become shorter. Dave S -----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 Laura V Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2013 6:52 AM To: alt-photo-process-list at lists.altphotolist.org Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: 1st attempt Ah, so by "thinner" you mean less pigment. I'll try that. I've read that less dichromate can give a less contrasty print...so I might try that too later, right now I just want to get up to the level where I was before. Thanks for reminding me about the book...if I remember correctly, that edition was coming out right about the time I abruptly quit printing. I'll definitely check it out. I do remember Christina's very helpful posts to the list over the years. Laura On 10/23/13 2:15 PM, Jack Brubaker wrote: > You will find it interesting (if you haven't already done so) to > search the archives of this list on the subject of gum. One of the > striking things is that many people are making fine prints with very > different methods. Your method is working but I think you want to fine > tune it. If so, while others can share their preferred methods, you > may get fine results by just tinkering. If I had made your print, I > would think about using a thinner coat with less pigment. Experiment > and keep notes. Many printers are now using less dichromate with good > results while saving an expensive material and having a less toxic > process. Again Chris Anderson's book "Gum Printing and other amazing > contact printing processes" is the encyclopedia of current and historical knowledge. It is available at: > http://www.alternativephotography.com/wp/ > > Jack > > > On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 8:36 AM, Laura V wrote: > >> On 10/23/13 2:16 AM, Jack Brubaker wrote: >> >>> Laura, >>> >>> That is a very good beginning for someone working by your self. >>> >> Thanks...you might have missed my re-introduction though. This is not >> my "1st" print, but my first after a 4 year break, and a few of the >> variables have changed (new gum, different light, etc) so it all feels different. >> >> A thin coat will be better bonded to the paper (the >>> exposure will penetrate to the paper), and can withstand a longer >>> development that will help clear whites and allow physical >>> development if needed. >>> >> This is what I thought, but I'm not sure if this means I should thin >> out my mixture, or just apply it more forcefully and spread it out >> better. I mixed my gum myself from lumps without weighing (because I >> did it before I got help here on how to do it) and it feels thicker >> than what I used before, so maybe it just needs more water. >> >> >>> It is most helpful when showing a print that you have questions >>> about to tell what your mix is of gum, water, and color, what your >>> exposure is, and how long it developed, and whether by just floating >>> on the water or with physical intervention. >>> >> Gum and dichromate one to one; one teaspoon each with a blob of color >> (about 1cm) which is what worked before. 4 min exposure. Developed >> for >> 20-30 mins face down in cold water, gently agitating the tray a few >> times and flipping it over to see how it was coming along. >> >> Most gum printers only >>> work in multi layers to avoid the problem you see in your print. >>> >> Oh yes, I intend to do 2 or 3 layers. >> >> >>> Welcome to the addiction of the ever elusive perfect gum print, >>> >> Heh, yeah it's crazy isn't it? Like learning Icelandic. >> >>> >>> On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 9:38 PM, Laura V wrote: >>> >>> Actually, it's the 2nd attempt, the first one peeled right off the >>> paper >>>> and washed away. It felt like the gum was thicker and stickier than >>>> I remembered using before, it was like honey, so I thinned it out >>>> to more of the consistency of maple syrup. I also increased the >>>> exposure a bit for good measure. This stuck to the paper much >>>> better, and the exposure seems right, but you can see there is >>>> still some peeling at the top in the sky. >>>> Has anyone had this problem? How do you like your gum mixture, >>>> thick or thin? >>>> >>>> The other problem I'm having is that the light source (my mercury >>>> vapor bulb that I put inside the vacuum press) is much closer to >>>> the glass that I had hoped...it is only about 20 cm away. So I >>>> guess that explains why the image gets whiter on the sides. I'll >>>> have to figure something out with the lighting. >>>> >>>> http://lauraval.com/mountain.****jpg>>> *jpg>< http://lauraval.com/mountain.**jpg >>>> > >>>> >>>> Laura >>>> ______________________________****_________________ >>>> Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org >>>> >>>> ______________________________**_________________ >>> Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org >>> >>> >>> >> ______________________________**_________________ >> Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org >> > _______________________________________________ > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > > _______________________________________________ Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org From jack at jackbrubaker.com Thu Oct 24 13:52:23 2013 From: jack at jackbrubaker.com (Jack Brubaker) Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2013 09:52:23 -0400 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: 1st attempt In-Reply-To: <5268FBD7.1080500@lavatop.com> References: <526728B2.9060807@lavatop.com> <5267C2C3.7090606@lavatop.com> <5268FBD7.1080500@lavatop.com> Message-ID: You are wise to alter one thing at a time. While it is accepted that dichromate concentration alters contrast that is a subtle effect compared to all the capacity of altering contrast by exposure and development. Jack On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 6:52 AM, Laura V wrote: > Ah, so by "thinner" you mean less pigment. I'll try that. > I've read that less dichromate can give a less contrasty print...so I > might try that too later, right now I just want to get up to the level > where I was before. > > Thanks for reminding me about the book...if I remember correctly, that > edition was coming out right about the time I abruptly quit printing. I'll > definitely check it out. I do remember Christina's very helpful posts to > the list over the years. > > Laura > > > On 10/23/13 2:15 PM, Jack Brubaker wrote: > >> You will find it interesting (if you haven't already done so) to search >> the >> archives of this list on the subject of gum. One of the striking things is >> that many people are making fine prints with very different methods. Your >> method is working but I think you want to fine tune it. If so, while >> others >> can share their preferred methods, you may get fine results by just >> tinkering. If I had made your print, I would think about using a thinner >> coat with less pigment. Experiment and keep notes. Many printers are now >> using less dichromate with good results while saving an expensive material >> and having a less toxic process. Again Chris Anderson's book "Gum Printing >> and other amazing contact printing processes" is the encyclopedia of >> current and historical knowledge. It is available at: >> http://www.**alternativephotography.com/wp/ >> >> Jack >> >> >> On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 8:36 AM, Laura V wrote: >> >> On 10/23/13 2:16 AM, Jack Brubaker wrote: >>> >>> Laura, >>>> >>>> That is a very good beginning for someone working by your self. >>>> >>>> Thanks...you might have missed my re-introduction though. This is not >>> my >>> "1st" print, but my first after a 4 year break, and a few of the >>> variables >>> have changed (new gum, different light, etc) so it all feels different. >>> >>> A thin coat will be better bonded to the paper (the >>> >>>> exposure will penetrate to the paper), and can withstand a longer >>>> development that will help clear whites and allow physical development >>>> if >>>> needed. >>>> >>>> This is what I thought, but I'm not sure if this means I should thin >>> out >>> my mixture, or just apply it more forcefully and spread it out better. I >>> mixed my gum myself from lumps without weighing (because I did it before >>> I >>> got help here on how to do it) and it feels thicker than what I used >>> before, so maybe it just needs more water. >>> >>> >>> It is most helpful when showing a print that you have questions >>>> about to >>>> tell what your mix is of gum, water, and color, what your exposure is, >>>> and >>>> how long it developed, and whether by just floating on the water or with >>>> physical intervention. >>>> >>>> Gum and dichromate one to one; one teaspoon each with a blob of color >>> (about 1cm) which is what worked before. 4 min exposure. Developed for >>> 20-30 mins face down in cold water, gently agitating the tray a few times >>> and flipping it over to see how it was coming along. >>> >>> Most gum printers only >>> >>>> work in multi layers to avoid the problem you see in your print. >>>> >>>> Oh yes, I intend to do 2 or 3 layers. >>> >>> >>> Welcome to the addiction of the ever elusive perfect gum print, >>>> >>>> Heh, yeah it's crazy isn't it? Like learning Icelandic. >>> >>> >>>> On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 9:38 PM, Laura V wrote: >>>> >>>> Actually, it's the 2nd attempt, the first one peeled right off the >>>> paper >>>> >>>>> and washed away. It felt like the gum was thicker and stickier than I >>>>> remembered using before, it was like honey, so I thinned it out to more >>>>> of >>>>> the consistency of maple syrup. I also increased the exposure a bit for >>>>> good measure. This stuck to the paper much better, and the exposure >>>>> seems >>>>> right, but you can see there is still some peeling at the top in the >>>>> sky. >>>>> Has anyone had this problem? How do you like your gum mixture, thick >>>>> or >>>>> thin? >>>>> >>>>> The other problem I'm having is that the light source (my mercury vapor >>>>> bulb that I put inside the vacuum press) is much closer to the glass >>>>> that I >>>>> had hoped...it is only about 20 cm away. So I guess that explains why >>>>> the >>>>> image gets whiter on the sides. I'll have to figure something out with >>>>> the >>>>> lighting. >>>>> >>>>> http://lauraval.com/mountain.******jpg >>>>> >>>>> >< >>>>> >>>>> http://lauraval.com/mountain.****jpg< >>>>> http://lauraval.com/mountain.**jpg >>>>> >> >>>>> >>>>> Laura >>>>> ______________________________******_________________ >>>>> Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org >>>>> >>>>> ______________________________****_________________ >>>>> >>>> Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ______________________________****_________________ >>> Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org >>> >>> ______________________________**_________________ >> Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org >> >> >> > ______________________________**_________________ > Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org > From dlhbloomfield at gmail.com Thu Oct 24 14:03:47 2013 From: dlhbloomfield at gmail.com (Diana Bloomfield) Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2013 10:03:47 -0400 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: URANOTYPE YOUTUBE URL In-Reply-To: <9B5E8527-66A0-487B-AA2B-038265CC4B76@gmail.com> References: <9B5E8527-66A0-487B-AA2B-038265CC4B76@gmail.com> Message-ID: <02DDF2A1-B75E-494F-82CC-899629F68A00@gmail.com> Thanks so much for doing that, Bob. I have the same issue as Anne, though. Is that easily fixed? I'd like to see it, too! Diana On Oct 24, 2013, at 8:53 AM, Anne Eder wrote: > I tried but was unable to view from this URL - it said it was private? > Would like to see it! > Anne > > Sent from my iPhone > >> On Oct 24, 2013, at 7:01 AM, "bobkiss @caribsurf.com" wrote: >> >> DEAR LIST, >> This is for those who asked to see the video I did for APIS on >> Uranotypes. Here is the URL: http://youtu.be/AeDK6byP2tk >> It is 52 minutes long! >> CHEERS! From christinazanderson at gmail.com Thu Oct 24 14:20:50 2013 From: christinazanderson at gmail.com (Christina Anderson) Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2013 08:20:50 -0600 Subject: [Alt-photo] APIS summary, beware, long Message-ID: Dear All, We all now know about Bob's wonderful Uranotype presentation, but I thought I could give an APIS summary of "the rest of the story" for those unable to go. This might explain to Laura what APIS is as well. I've been attending APIS since 1999, only having missed a couple, so the best thing about APIS is seeing some of the same faces I have seen for 14 years. We are a small niche community, aren't we? I was disappointed at the turnout, but these are less discretionary income times with lots of competing demands. However, I was surprised to not see more students at these presentations when there are TWO (not one) local colleges teaching alt! In fact, I was thrilled to be able to see that there are TWO teachers at SF Art and Design (Mike Webb is it and Chris Nail) teaching alt! They were teaching the night of the presentation by Cristina so we got to see their students and their dimrooms. And the students' alt works were hung smartly on these framed metal screens with those little nail-sized magnets, a great idea for a hanging device. APIS in the start was about 150 people I might guess. My favorite was when we all stayed together at St. John's University. This APIS was about 40-50. The setting was lovely. It was at a brand new Santa Fe Community College which had a cafeteria right next to where the presentations were occurring. The weather in October is gorgeous. Next to the presentation room was a side room with tables where people had their prints out for all to see, another benefit to this conference. There was some really beautiful work there. I loved Joe P's (forget spelling of his last name) little mini prints, really teeny!! Phil Schwartz's carbons. A lot of platinums by various people. Jason Lazarus' VDBs of Alaskan gold mines. And Lorran Meares (sp?) has some incredible 3D images that look like Jerry Uelsmann meets Doug Prince and Arthur Tress in 3 dimensions. The first night Cristina Kahlo gave an excellent presentation to a packed house in the theatre at the College of Art and Design. Lots of great pictures of her great-grandfather, Guillermo Kahlo, who was a Mexico City photographer in the 1900s (also father of Frida). Cristina is as charming as was her presentation, well timed, well-illustrated. After there was a reception at the Marion Center with the works from the five Mexican photographers that came to APIS. I was particularly blown away by the tricolor photopolymer prints by Byron Brauchli. Another great exhibition set was a gum bichromate skull image done in 10 different colors/ways by I think Eric Jervaise from Mexico. But that is to be expected since I am into color alt. Friday Jill Enfield gave her talk. Jill was the honored photographer at the presentation and also giving an albumen workshop at the end of the conference. She showed her work which was just wonderful to see. I had seen some of it here and there in books, but to see her whole "oeuvre" so to speak was really fruitful as she is a versatile photographer. Her latest project, portraits of immigrants in collodion, is a very contemporary theme in an old process, something I like to see more of. I also had the pleasure of being "roomies" with Jill and that made the trip! Then the Mexico contingent gave individual presentations about their creative work. Never enough time, when a panel presentation is done, IMHO. Usually the last one gets short shrift, which was the case, so Cristina got 3 minutes to talk! She was very gracious about it. Julio Galindo was there who I think is on this list and I think has presented in the past. He, Eric, Byron, and Cristina were the presenters and we even had a Skype call with Rafael Galvan Montolo who could not make it. I was (no surprise there, given my research) particularly entranced with Art Kaplan's talk about the identification project of old prints that the Getty is developing. Art is a wonderful speaker, to the point, well-timed, and showed "signatures" for want of a better term of photographs they have identified all over the world. Example: a photograph is said to be a platinum print but under electron microscope it is found to be a photo mechanical e.g. from a plate in a printmaking press print. Another example is that a casein print will exhibit phosphorus as a signature element. This project is available on the web as someone pointed out a while ago on this list, but to hear Art talk about it makes it much more fascinating. There is that one-day presentation at the Getty December 5 that looks like a must-visit. Madelyn Willis and Dick Sullivan gave a Rawlins Oil demo/talk and showed their prints. They have been collaborating together laboriously working out this process. The good news is Dick has developed a Rawlins paper for sale through B&S so you don't have to make your own gelatin-coated paper to do this process. They gave away several of their HUGE oil prints as a door prize, one in particular a pretty stellar image of blue trees in the forest (and big) that Madelyn had created. Saturday I gave a casein talk and demo. I will be sharing that talk again in Seattle at SPENW Friday 3PM Art Institute Seattle Nov 8. Then Richard Puckett gave a Texas Chrsotype demo which with his sense of humor was a HOOT and his book is a mere $10 so maybe chrysotype is in my (my students') future. I don't know much about it but the range of color from eggplant to blue to whatever is pretty compelling. Then of course Bob's wonderful Uranotype presentation. Between Bob and Richard's sense of humor it was a pretty humorous Saturday. The end of APIS was a presentation by Barret Oliver on woodburytypes that he is collaborating with Chuck Close on. He brought a bunch in person to show us and they are really quite juicy, and also did a great slide show of how they create the plates and make the work. I now know that whatever it is I do is a piece of CAKE compared to woodburytype. We also found out that when printmaking for another person it is normal NOT to have your name attached to the work, only the artist's name, and apparently that is not an appropriate issue to dialogue about in no uncertain terms :) Yikes. OK that'd be it! I hope I have not left anything out. Chris Christina Z. Anderson http://christinaZanderson.com/ From sbilici at gmail.com Thu Oct 24 14:51:51 2013 From: sbilici at gmail.com (sbilici at gmail.com) Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2013 14:51:51 +0000 Subject: [Alt-photo] Re: URANOTYPE YOUTUBE URL In-Reply-To: Message-ID: I would very much like to see it too. :) Is it possible? It says the video is private at the moment. Regards Serdar ------ Original Message ------ From: "bobkiss @caribsurf.com" To: alt-photo-process-list at lists.altphotolist.org Sent: 24.10.2013 14:01:55 Subject: [Alt-photo] URANOTYPE YOUTUBE URL >DEAR LIST, This is for those who asked to see the video I did for >APIS on Uranotypes. Here is the URL: http://youtu.be/AeDK6byP2tk >It is 52 minutes long! CHEERS! > BOB >_______________________________________________ Alt-photo-process-list >| altphotolist.org