[Alt-photo] Re: 1st attempt

Thu Oct 24 13:52:23 UTC 2013

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