>First a reproach: For a race of men who think watching a bunch of career
>jocks run around in circles after an otherwise useless piece of pigskin
>that's never going to do anything for anyone is an honorable afternoon's
work to be disparaging people who add to the sum total of human knowledge
>by recording the whereabouts of real trains simply passes belief.
As neither frightens the horses I don't care much either way. I am not in
control of journalistic usage.
>Secondly, lumping the true *wonk* in with the merely sartorially
>challenged shows that the dumbing down of America has reached England, or
>maybe it started there. Dressing uncool is of course unpardonable
>and the sooner we have the death penalty for anorakery the better, but to
>cast intellectual expertise in general and the care & feeding of computer
<screens in particular as equal to bad dressing indicates once more the
>decline of civilisation.
Note for Jim and Judy
As I had to get mountain rescued after I collapsed with hypothermia in 100 mph
winds which my standard gear would not keep out, the wind filled my boots with
rain through the eyelets for the laces in my boots, I now own a Gortex anorak
which I value and wear especially when using the 10 x 8 in winter.
>And speaking of the decline of civilisation:
>On Wed, 26 Jun 1996, TERRY KING wrote [that he "develops" a gum print in]
> ....two minutes wash in running water under the tap.
>In fact I suspect he's baiting me. That's not how you develop a gum print.
>That's how an 8-year old takes a bath.
Judy if you read that posting ever so carefully you will find that was a quote
from an authoritative modern guide on ink on paper printing techniques,the same
persons also recommended exposing dichromated albumen under an enlarger.
>A gum print is developed face down without stirring for a minimum of 30
>minutes, preferable an hour, often several hours, and up to 24 can continue
>to> bring improvement. Which was the problem with the hard gelatine: it
>didn't improve no matter how long you developed it: nothing happened. In
>fact even when the paper was not exposed at all, the emulsion did not
>soak or wash off the paper with the two hard gelatines (porcine from
>America, de-ionized from England).
>Which I suppose is why you choose "spray and hose" for development,
>Terry: You have to.
The gelatine will clear in about half an hour in a leach/gentle wash bath. Maybe
you cannot do that in Manhattan but I can in Twickenham and it works. I
develop my gum prints in the manner most appropriate for the variation on the
standard process that I am using at the time.
>My interest in the harder gelatin was because -- and in this my finding
>agrees with yours Terry -- it doesn't require further hardening. In fact
>given a glyoxal bath, it gets, if possible, worse.
AsI have said in a posting that I sent a millisecond before I received this one,
I do not like hardened galatine as a base, the pterotype and acrylochrome
methods are better. I am preparing a recipe for anorakotypes which includes
teachers in photography departments who know a lot of theory but nothing about
photography.
>N.B. The hardener making matters worse applies only to these "hard"
>gelatines. Knox (about 200 bloom, I'm told) stains badly unelss hardened
>-- tho the worst staining on Knox was a better print than the "best" of
>the hard gelatines.
When I started the only time I got staining was when the gum was not thick
enough.
>Yes, a few odds & ends of the hard gelatine tests could have been used to
>make a print, but in no case were they better than the Knox-sized paper, and
>often not as good as plain unsized.
It seems the answer Judy is to give up presizing with gelatine.
> but since the thought of putting my prints under running
>tap water makes me about to faint,
That was the reaction it was intended to induce.
> I think I shall pass on the hard
>gelatine from now on, except for carbon printing and gluing print to a
>rigid support, about which more in future.
Well it works great for my method of sizing gum prints and for other processes
too.
> Because I find it more effective to work from the plate and I keep the liquid
> ossein warm in its water bath.
>Terry, I put the beaker in a water bath and dipped into it with the brush.
>This was simpler & saved washing a dish.
I keep mine in the dark room sink. I do not think that this is going to get Mr
Hoover's knickers in a twist.
Judy