FotoDave@aol.com
Date: 02/16/00-09:34:55 PM Z
In a message dated 2/16/00 8:59:03 PM Eastern Standard Time,
jseigel@panix.com writes:
> Dave, I know you said it but my brain was on low last week -- would you
> tell us again why you use alum rather than glyoxal? It's probably
> cheaper, but the amounts used (of glyyoxal) are small.
Hi Judy,
I have no particular strong reason. It's just that I have alum (and a pack
that is almost 20 years) and have used it to size rice paper for painting, so
I tried it out (w/o seeing any formula), and it worked. Later I found there
were formula using alum for sizing also.
> Have you tried the
> glyoxal? If not, I surely wish you would -- would be great to have a
> comparison.
I have not used glyoxal. But the gelatin+alum size, aside from being slower
(that is, I have to wait a few days before I use it), size quite well. There
is no staining at well, paper gets pure white. It is probably neither worse
nor better than glyoxal though I haven't compared them.
Dave Soemarko
***************************************************************************
***** See Soemarko's Direct Carbon (SDC) prints at
***** http://hometown.aol.com/fotodave/SDC/
***************************************************************************
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 04/24/00-04:37:10 PM Z CST