Altview@aol.com
Sun, 23 May 1999 00:31:23 -0400 (EDT)
In my work, because of the different size cameras I use, I work with both the
rod and the brush. I use the rod on 8 X 10 and 11 X 14, but found it to
difficult to work with on 12 X 20 and 14 X 17 due to the paper buckling on
those sizes. I went back to using a brush on the bigger prints and do not see
any difference in quality, surface, or evenness between the two forms of
coating. When I first started printing 12 X 20's I had a custom glass rod
made for the size, but struggled against the paper warping under the moisture
from the sensitizer. When I started to print 14 X 17 negatives, I went back
to the brush and got beautiful results, which in turn caused me to abandon
the rod for the 12 X 20s. I think results would be indistinquishable between
the two methods once one has mastered both. I found an absolutely beautiful
brush at Pearl Art Supplies in Los Angeles that is a long natural bristle
brush in a long wooden handle with no metal ferrule. A trick I use to make
the brush less absorbent to the sensitizer is to literally shave and taper
the bristles using a standard shaving razor, in my case a Gillette Atra.
Using the razor, I shaved and tapered the brush to a much finer point and
eliminated about 50% of the bristles to keep from wasting some much of the
sensitizer. The 2" brush costs about $18.95 and has a very long dark red
handle. The brush has no markings on it, so if anyone wants to order one, a
description would be the only way to describe it. It has a band of black
paint just above the bristles. The shaving technique also works well for sumi
brushes.
Patrick Alt
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu Oct 28 1999 - 21:39:35