Re: Gravure workshops

Peter Charles Fredrick (pete@fotem.demon.co.uk)
Wed, 31 Jul 1996 01:57:26 +0000

>Strange said:
>
>
>>May I respectfully suggest that statements concerning methods such as
>>polymer photogravure, for which no canonical rules have as yet been
>>established, be qualified by something like: "To my knowledge ..." or "With
>>such and such a procedure we found ...".
>
>Willingly. I will rephrase to ' The prints that i have seen so far from photo
>polymer plateds do not have the range or tone or subtlety that we have obtaoned
>using aquatinted copper.'
>
>> The reason for this wish is that
>>after more than 1/2 year's concentrated work with polymer gravure I am now
>>able to produce prints with very deep velvety blacks, and with a complete
>>lack of graininess even under a loupe (except, of course, for that of the
>>original negative).
>
>I would love to see them. I have only seen prints made according to the
>'Howerd'
>method and some, I believe made by Ele ponsaing's method.
>
>Surely if you can see no grain at all does this not imply that you were using
>no
>kind of screen.
>
>
>
>> Further, as opposed to gravure on aquatinted copper
>>which - as I understand the process - yields only a limited number of grey
>>shades, the polymer gravure produces as continuous an image as that of the
>>original negative.
>
>Not in my experience. In fact the only process that competes in tonal range
>with gravure prints I have made is carbon.
>
>Terry King
>Not in my experience. In fact the only process that competes in tonal range
>with gravure prints I have made is carbon.<

I would like to agree with my friend Terry, but because we have not seen it
Mate does not necessarily mean that it does not exit, as dear old Harold
used to say lets keep our options open .

pete