Hake Brush

Stephen R. Harrison (stephenr@silcom.com)
Wed, 11 Sep 1996 00:12:20 -0700

I have for one and one-half years used The Winsor/ Newton Univ Gold
brush with a metal ferrule for Pt/Pd Printing with no problems until
recently when I suppose that either rust or metal contamination became a
problem with very minute contamination evident as pinholes in the
highlights Someone has suggested clear fingernail polish to be dropped
into the furrule part of the brush in the future which might prevent this.
I suppose the sensitizer by capillary action did in fact travel Northward
and probably contributed to the problem. But in all fairness, the brush
did work well for one full year in an excellent manner. The problem I have
had with the Hake brush is that it is much more absorbent than the Gold
Series one described and I am sure absorbs a lot of sensitizer. The
synthetic brissels do not seem to do this. I have shaved the hake brush
with an electric razor so that there are less brissles which helps but
still the problem of absorption remains. The glass rod does not work well
with translucent papers at all and a brush is the only way to go in that
case. I think it was Martin Axon who was responsible for the development
of Platine Paper ?? who told me when I was having trouble with Platine ,
that he felt the glass rod was good for only 3 or 4 swipes and then to use
a brush. His experience was that the brush helped to work the sensitizer
into the fibers of the paper much more effectively than the glass rod. He
used the rod for the initial spreading only. I also do that for the
translucent papers and I think his point is well taken. So I also am now
using Hake brushes but I am not so sold on them and am inclined to agree
with Judy that the metal ferrule is not a big deal. Excess absorption of
precious platinum is a big deal!

Stephen Harrison