<< Basically it is all counterintuitive to a gum printer. He says to put in
some pigment and add just a few drops of gum until all the pigment is taken
up. In my case a big pile of pigment and a few drops of gum. You then you
add 4 to 6 times (or more) the amount of dichromate solution.
>>
Hi Dick,
I didn't know Zimmerman when I made my first gum print (well, I have heard his
name but didn't know any details about his method), but I basically did/got
the same thing as he did when I make my very first gum print.
Coming from a watercolor painting background, when I mixed my *first*
gum/sensitizer mix, I looked at it and said to myself: "this mix is so thin,
how could it possibly produce any nice black at all?" So I just added
watercolor pigment to it. I added and added until it looks right (as a
watercolorist, but most gum printer would say it is way too "thick."). Then I
did my step tablet print (long exposure and long development), and yes it
worked.
As I now started to construct a "physical model" to hopefully better explain
gum, I do see that it fits and it is not difficult to explain how/why it
works, but I would like to gather more data before saying too much. Since you
mentioned in your previous mail that you were also interested in the
rationalization of gum, may I request that you put this particular gum print
(however good or bad it looks, it doesn't matter, I think the physical data is
more important) in your Web site? If it is a big print, it would be helpful to
have a full-size section that covers both highlight and shadows.
Also, does the midtone (or close to highlight) areas look grainy / flaky?
Thanks in advance for your information!
DS (Dave Soemarko, not Dick Sullivan or David Scopic) :)