Jeffrey D. Mathias (jeffrey.d.mathias@worldnet.att.net)
Thu, 18 Feb 1999 15:41:22 -0500
jewelia wrote,
> ...the draw back i suppose for
> some of you afficiandos is that, as i recall, this paper is pure sulfite --
> no cotton. oh--my godness no!...
I don't think it's a drwback if one can get the look they're after.
This does bring up the question of just how archival could sulfite
papers be?
Has anyone researched this?
jewelia also wrote:
> ...any bristol paper users out there?
The problem with most bristals (which really means more than one ply) is
that the plys peal apart when wet. Although I have found one that stays
together and works nicely for the Pt/Pd process. And wouldn't you know,
it a SULFITE paper. My notes on it follow.
Artist Drawing Bristol - plate finish (#1 Sulfite)
Excellent quality, depth, and substance.
Very good detail in print.
Hard surface gives plenty of time to coat.
Coating must loose glossy look before blow drying.
It is available from most art supply stores.
jewelia, on trees, wrote:
> ...-trees are
> just sugar only very tightly chemically bound together--beyond what we can
> digest in fact...
Not really. Cellulose is an optical isomer of a sugar (dextrose or
sucrose, I can't recall which one right now.). That means the molecules
have all the same components except the they are arranged as the mirror
image of one another. Because of this mirror image structure, the
enzymes in our bodies cannot attach, causing them to not be digested.
So it's not the tightly bound, rather the bound as an optical isomer.
-- Jeffrey D. Mathias http://home.att.net/~jeffrey.d.mathias/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Sat Nov 06 1999 - 10:06:51