[Alt-photo] Re: 1st attempt

[Dave S]

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 <laura at lavatop.com> 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 <laura at lavatop.com> 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 
>>>> <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