>> I know that "good" prints cannot
>> be made with current materials ....
>
>Dick, that's a misprint, right? Tell us you meant "'good' prints *can* be
>made with current materials." If not, am waiting to hear what is 'bad'
>about all the gum prints in the world from Kasebier to present company.
Dick really meant "can be made" of course.
I guess I should watch the Olympics and do my e-mail at the same time.
Sorry Judy.
As to testing ball milled pigment -- that too would be a neccessity. It's
one of the reasons for asking the List for advice. I trust the opinons of
respected people here such as yourself. If you had said that you had tried
it and didn't find any advantage, I would probably drop the issue right off.
Since you have expressed an opinion based on a conversation with a pigment
expert, this leads me to be pessimistic.
On the practical side of things, I worry more about the mess as opposed to
the cost of setting up a home made milling line. I ball milled palladium
chloride once, and it came out so fine that the slightest waft of air blew
up a cloud of PdCl2. I can imagine the mess superfine ball milled pigments
would do to my lab area.
Dick S.
Bostick & Sullivan
1541 Center Dr.
Santa Fe, New Mexico
87505