From: Jeff Buck (jeffbuck@swcp.com)
Date: 12/30/02-11:14:33 AM Z
Sandy: I've never used the COT320 mentioned by Clay, but some
notes: First, it's available through Bergger, I think exclusively. More
expensive (even) than Plain Platine. Kerik Kouklis also uses this for his
straight platinums. I assume (Kerik? Clay?) that for best Pt/Pd results
it must be double-coated, same as Plain Platine. I use Plain Platine for
the most part, and have been able to work around the spots etc. You can
see them just by putting the paper in front of a strongish light, then do
test prints on areas w/ a spot, or use the negative to verify that the spot
is in the margin someplace, etc., and end up OK. Not much trouble at
all. I've tried, for Pt/Pd: Platine, Lenox, Masa, Gampi, Stonehenge,
Whatman's Watercolor (w/ OA dip), Fabriano Uno (w/ OA dip), and maybe one
or two I'm forgetting. I think Platine (and presumably COT320) is still
the best, given your criteria (and, in general, mine). For very different
results, Lenox and Masa are really good and both are dirt cheap. In some
prints, Masa, this real delicate and translucent Japanese paper, gives,
when printed on the shiny side, a very strong impression of fine detail
(Carl Weese should be consulted). Platine is the main street but take a
side trip w/ some Masa. It's intriguing stuff. I don't use Whatman's or
Fabriano for straight Pt/Pd, though I'm using both just now for
pigment-overs (new project).... -JB
At 11:33 AM 12/30/2002 -0500, Sandy King wrote:
>I would be interested in hearing the opinions of platinum printers
>regarding what they consider to be the best papers when the main criteria
>are, 1) shows fine detail, and 2) clears easily. And I mean papers used
>out of the package, i.e, with no additional sizing!
>
>Sandy King
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : 01/31/03-09:31:26 AM Z CST