FotoDave@aol.com
Fri, 15 Jan 1999 12:37:37 -0500 (EST)
In a message dated 1/15/99 8:24:30 AM Pacific Standard Time,
tomf2468@pipeline.com writes:
> But, all the paper
> making literature I've read indicates that Alum is not a good size if
> archival properties are important to you. Over time (how long I don't
> know) it is said to cause hardening and yellowing.
Yes, but that's when the paper is used for painting so you don't wash out the
alum. Luis mentioned once that for our processes by the time the process is
completed, the extra alum would have been washed out.
> Interesting that you used alum on "rice" paper. Rice paper does exist, but
> is both rare and rather poor quality. I assume that when you (and most of
> the world) say "rice paper" you are talking about Japanese style gampi or
> kozo paper?
It depends on what you consider poor quality. I bought my rice paper from the
Orient, and I could (still can with mail order) buy good quality rice paper
used by professional Chinese brush painters.
I use Chinese rice paper not the Japanese style. They are similar in painting
characteristic but I believe the plants used to make the pulp are different.
> If so (just wondering out loud), perhaps the archival
> properties of alum (or lack of) are different / better on kozo or gampi
> than with "western" style cotton paper (what most of us use for photo
> paper).
No, they are probably not better. That's one of the reason (although not the
only reason) that the old Chinese paintings look yellow and they do become
extremely fragile, but the reason they didn't break into millions tiny dust is
because they are mounted on another piece of rice paper which is unsized and
unhardened. The mounted piece is then again mounted on another stronger rice
paper when they make the scroll. In this way they are held together even
though the front side itself has become fragile.
Dave
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Sat Nov 06 1999 - 10:06:42