Carolina Card

Alex Nanson (alec@norlex.demon.co.uk)
Sat, 19 Oct 1996 21:08:35 +0100

In message <Pine.SUN.3.94.961014183659.18011G-100000@panix2.panix.com>,
Judy Seigel <jseigel@panix.com> writes
>
>
>Alex, Standard commercial printing papers don't get soaked in the process,
>and even if dampened are *coated* with an oily ink (in fact that may be
>why coated -- so the ink doesn't soak in). My hunch would be that
>a coated paper wouldn't be good for gum because clay would wash off during
>soak. I wouldn't be surprised if it did likewise with other process, and I
>wonder (tho maybe someone else can say for sure) if clay coated paper is
>archival anyway .... Sounds like the price is right, tho -- why not try
>something easy, like cyanotype.... Or even just soak the paper for a while
>& see what happens.
>

Judy,

Thank you for your commemts. I tried soaking the card as you suggested,
and as far as I could see the clay did not wash out. I also tried
coating the dry card with two gum formulations, one on gum arabic, the
other on poly vinyl alcohol,( I could'nt find my ferric ammonium citrate
for the Cyanotype), neither one wetted the card very well, even with the
addition of a wetting agent.

This was perhaps because the clay rendered the card somewhat
hydrophobic. The next test is to give the card a slight soak in water
and try a gelatine sub coat, before going any further.

I don't know what the archival qualities would be, but as I have about
150 square yards of the stuff, it seems worthwhile persevering with
it,as it would be handy for tests.

Alex.
Alex Nanson
Gloucester UK