From: Robert W. Schramm (schrammrus@hotmail.com)
Date: 06/02/00-06:57:55 AM Z
Judy,
I looked very carefully at a large portfolio of about 40 prints.
Most of the paper was smooth but matt. However, there were three
prints that were on what looked like a paper one might use for
pastel or charcoal i.e. a rather rough surface. I saw no evidence of
varnish or lacquer. But then, Demachy was so good that, if he used
anything like that, we would probably not be able to tell.
Anyway it makes me want to get back to gum. I'll add that to my
already too-long list.
Have been processing rolls of B & W and have some great stuff---
enough to keep me busy for years. Before I left I experimented
with various ilford B&W films processed in Xtol a la Steve Anchell.
That's what I used on this trip and the negatives are gorgous.
Thanks for the spelling correction ;-) (Demachy)
Bob "Bub"
>From: Judy Seigel <jseigel@panix.com>
>Reply-To: alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca
>To: alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca
>Subject: Demachy
>Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 22:07:41 -0400 (EDT)
>
>
>
>On Wed, 31 May 2000, Robert W. Schramm wrote:
>
> > These beautiful prints had great tonal range and depth, as well as,
> > exceptional detail. Many of them looked more like platinum prints
> > than gum. So, my friends, all that stuff about gum not showing detail
> > and not having good tonal range is bunk. You would agree if you
> > could have seen these.
>
>Well Bob, maybe when it comes from a French-speaking fella they'll believe
>it. I've been saying that for years, like shouting into a well.
>
> > How did he do it? I wish I knew. It has given me a great deal of
> > respect for the gum print. (Judy, I wish you could have seen
> > these prints. "Breath-taking!!!"-another phrase that comes to mind.
>
>I've seen quite a number of *Demachy*s in reproduction, and this is very
>apparent. Post-Factory #1 quotes a bunch of text on the topic from both
>Demachy and his colleague Puyo. As I recall I didn't reprint their
>complete instructions, tho they are in print, and I've given the essence,
>which is simple enough... long careful development, with selective pouring
>of water -- and a nice smooth paper -- NO RIVES BFK !!! As I recall, the
>reprint collection "Non-Silver processes" (in the 1970s, edited by... was
>it Bunnell?) had the definitive essay by Maskell, in English. I'll look
>it up.
>
>But now do you understand why I'm still pining & whining for that "vernis
>sohenee", the "varnish," or lacquer, or whatever he said he used to deepen
>the tone ! ?
>
>Judy
>
>
> >
> > Demeche was a member as was Foucault. There are some daguerreotypes
> > of the sun and its spectrum in their collection.
> >
> > Bob "Bub" Schramm
> > ________________________________________________________________________
> > Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
> >
> >
>
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 07/14/00-09:46:44 AM Z CST