> For Platinum printing, I am now a devoted user of Arches Platine. I
I suspect Platine could be used well for gum, too, as it's absorbent,
smooth and doesn't do any of the bad things papers like Arches Aquarelle
do with gum. It's just that it's so damn expensive and gum has so many
fits & starts (at least in my hands) I decided not to pursue it.
> results by double coating it with two relatively light coats. I use
> only about 25% more sensitizer to double-coat Platine than I use
> to single-coat other papers. I've read in the archives (yes, I do
> read the archives, Judy!) that some people find it less than
> "honorable" to double coat a platinum print. Everyone is entitled
Hunh? Maybe I wasn't listening when they said that. But speaking of the
archives and paper, Bob Schramm, do you remember when we had the
discussion about Rives BFK being buffered? (Some of us were warning against
buffered for cyanotype, which fades in alkali.) The Daniel Smith catalog
says it is, the manufacturer (someone reported at the time) says it isn't.
Three possibilities come to mind (of the no-doubt many):
1. Water in Schramm-town is so acidic buffered paper works OK for cyanotype
2. Because his formula has added acid, it counteracts the buffering of
the paper.
3. His prints will fade, next year, next decade.
4. The Daniel Smith catalog is wrong.
5. Some people lead charmed lives.
6. My students (whose cyanotypes on BFK are not satisfactory) are not
among them.
OK, that's 6.
Any others?
Judy