From: Witho Worms en Jorien van Santen (verzet13@xs4all.nl)
Date: 02/03/02-03:04:08 AM Z
First coat, expose and than cut. That is the easy way. Start to use
ammoniumfericoxalate and you will not engage that many black specks anymore.
Witho
----- Original Message -----
From: "clay" <wcharmon@wt.net>
To: <alt-photo-process-l@skyway.usask.ca>
Sent: Sunday, February 03, 2002 4:37 AM
Subject: Re: Arches Platine
> Anybody have any instructions for platine origami?
>
> ----------
> >From: Jeff Buckels <jeffbuck@swcp.com>
> >To: alt-photo-process-l@skyway.usask.ca
> >Subject: Re: Arches Platine
> >Date: Sat, Feb 2, 2002, 10:48 AM
> >
>
> >Clay and All: Stewart Melvin put me onto this kind of inspection of
Platine.
> >So, I'd go to this good local art supply store and tell the clerk to just
plop
> >the top pack of Platine in front of me and let me alone to pick out a few
> >sheets. Permitted. So, I'd laboriously hold sheet after sheet up to the
> >ceiling flourescent lights (which Stewart specified) and search for
specks.
> >I'd reject at least half the sheets. In the end I got clean sheets which
> >pretty much solved the speck problem. BUT that meant I had to go
storefront
> >retail, and the 22/30 sheets of Platine were (are) $6.25 or something
like
> >that a sheet. Unacceptable. And I feel getting Platine through the mail
is
> >unacceptable (can't examine!). I'm trying Lenox this weekend,
Platinotype
> >soon as I can get around to it. -jeff buckels
> >
> >clay wrote:
> >
> >> Katherine:
> >> I was about ready to have a bonfire last week after a bout with the
> >> speckles. After letting my blood pressure drop, I had a better session
> >> yesterday by carefully inspecting each sheet by holding it up against a
60
> >> watt light and carefully looking for any specks. I rejected about 1 in
4
> >> sheets and had minimal problems this time. Still a few tiny spots
> >> occasionally, but all fixable.
> >>
> >> If this paper didn't make such great prints, I'd have ditched it long
ago.
> >> It appears that bits of something are falling into the paper when it is
> >> made, because almost all of them appear to be within the paper itself.
The
> >> lesson learned: check very carefully before spreading anything on this
> >> paper.
> >>
> >> It makes a great gum-over paper if only one gum layer is contemplated.
> >>
> >> Clay
> >> ----------
> >> >From: Katharine Thayer <kthayer@pacifier.com>
> >> >To: alt-photo-process-l@skyway.usask.ca
> >> >Subject: Re: Arches Platine
> >> >Date: Sat, Feb 2, 2002, 1:02 AM
> >> >
> >>
> >> >I've been spending a fair amount of time with Arches Platine the last
> >> >few weeks, evaluating it for a gum printing paper. Some observations:
> >> >
> >> >It has two different apparently sizing-related "issues." The first is
> >> >the blotchiness it develops when wet, which disappears on drying and
> >> >doesn't appear to affect the image. The second is apparent in some
> >> >sheets and not in others. It appears immediately on coating; it
> >> >manifests as very small dark spots or speckles where the coating is
> >> >absorbed differentially; and once it has made its appearance, the
print
> >> >is not salvageable, (unless of course the printer finds the speckles
> >> >attractive).
> >> >
> >> >I have found that ammonia, which I use as a chemical "dodger" in the
> >> >development stage of gum printing, is useless with Platine. With other
> >> >papers, I can float ammonia across an area that I want to be a bit
> >> >lighter, and the ammonia will gently loosen and lift excess hardened
gum
> >> >and pigment there while leaving the image intact. With Platine, the
> >> >ammonia blasts right through the image and out the back of the paper.
> >> >The wet spot it leaves in the back of the paper will disappear on
> >> >drying, but the white spot in the print where the gum and pigment were
> >> >stripped off the paper is there forever.
> >> >
> >> >kt
> >> >
> >
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 03/08/02-09:45:21 AM Z CST