Richard, one caveat: Don't make the 50 gallons until you've tried the gum
in several situations. When was it -- only yesterday? -- I praised the
Daniel Smith "Premier" gum after seeing it on some 26 different pieces of
paper exposed under a 21-step.
So late last night I used it for a *second* coat of some prints in
progress. On all three it left a shiny heavy build-up that lost the
paper surface and obscured the shadow detail, and generally glared
and flared and looked uglier than Bob Dole. I was so bummed about losing one
particular print that I attempted to abrade it off. Didn't happen. (And
for those about to try, if there is any texture in your paper at all,
sandpaper makes measles.) The only remote help was an etcher's snake
stick, a sort of hard stick of pumice, but that was de minimus.
I'm uncertain whether this was due to the gum itself or to the fact that I
didn't dilute it with water as I customarily dilute the RBP gum. Though I
certainly have in times of excess and general sickness made prints with
many coats, even I admit it, as many as 7 or 8 coats in certain areas,
with no such miserable effect.
As I happen to have a relatively large supply of stupid prints on hand, I
shall sacrifice one for my sins, coating it with a DS emulsion diluted with
water, and an RBP emulsion undiluted.... (Meanwhile, hold off on the 50
gallons, Dick.)
But you also ask,
> What is your
feeling, if any, about what makes on gum better than another? > I know you
said you had few conclusions but you might have some intuitions. > >
Thinking out loud.
I would have said I don't think one gum is better than another across the
board, my sense being that each gum has its plusses and minuses and its
fits and misfits. The same "impurities" that make it stain on one paper,
or with one color, may act like vitamins or hormones with another.
But now, maybe one is worse...... which would save folks $60 a gallon!
Judy