Re: Clearing Gum Bichromates

Carson Graves x4692 3NE (carson@zama.hq.ileaf.com)
Wed, 10 Jan 96 17:04:29 EST

>
> On Thu, 11 Jan 1996, Mike Ware wrote:
> > So the chromium is not removed by the clearing
> > agent, just made less visible. It would seem better to wash it out if you
> > can. It also seems to me likely that residual dichromate will be slowly
> > reduced to chromium(III) by constituents of the paper anyway.
>
> Buffered paper?
>
> Whatever, that is so cool ....another piece of holy writ bites the dust.
> And another! And another! (Of course there's always more where they came
> from, encouraging innocent merriment for ever and ever amen.)
>
> Judy

I hesitate to jump in here, since my last (sucessful) chemistry class
was in secondary school, but years ago when I was gum printing, I
followed the "holy writ" (a dilute alum solution) for a final clearing
bath and got a pale, but definitely yellow solution left after
soaking in it.

Even after reading all the discussion, I can't help but believe that
there was dichromate coming out of the print, dichromate that wasn't
being removed after prolonged "development" in plain water. I can't
deny that it might have been the effect of another (mostly) water bath
that I was observing, and not the action of the alum, but then why
wasn't the final development bath as yellow as the clearning bath?

Also, all of the chemicals so far discussed: alum, sodium bisulfite,
and sodium metabisulfite are hardeners. Would this treatment also be
beneficial to the gum emulsion (I have always assumed so) or do they
just harden gelatin?

A bit puzzled -
Carson