Re: Coating for carbon

Michael Sandquist (Roidman@gnn.com)
Mon, 21 Oct 1996 21:21:23

Indeed!

Michael Sandquist
>Date: Tue, 22 Oct 96 14:24:11 +1000
>From: sanking@hubcap.clemson.edu (Sandy King)
>Sender: alt-photo-process@cse.unsw.edu.au
>To: Multiple recipients of list <alt-photo-process@cse.unsw.edu.au>
>Subject: Re: Coating for carbon
>
>Al wrote:
>
>>Thats exactly what I found. Which means that when poured, the wet gelatin
>>can be under 1 mm in thickness. You are right that heavier can't hurt. You
>>just end up leaving more on the tissue after transfer, which gets thrown
> away.
>>But this is of importance from a financial standpoint, especially if using
>>tube watercolors for pigment.
>>
>Guys, I got to tell you that the question of tissue thickeness is a lot
>more interesting than you are letting on. The amount of pigment in the
>gelatin,combined with the quanity of pigmented used to coat a specific
>area, has a very important relationship on, a) image contrast, and b)
>relief characteristics of the final image. To understand this, draw a cross
>section of two pigment tissue, one very thick and lightly pigmented,
>another thin and highly pigmented, and run through your mind what will
>happen with these two tissues, given an equal strength dichromate
>sensitizer, and the same exposure to light.
>
>Sandy
>
>