From: Cactus Cowboy (cactus@tritel.net)
Date: 02/16/02-08:37:32 AM Z
Hello John,
I'm using 8X10, 11X14, 12X20, and 16X20 inch lith film to produce enlarged
negatives for gum printing. I use 1/4" steel pins to register the negative
to the paper, so I need fairly large borders on the film. A 16X20 sheet of
film yields an image of approximately 15X19, a nice size for display. My
negatives are masked, printing a clean white border. I prefer not showing
ragged brush marks outside the image area, as I consider it distracting.
I prefer making larger prints, especially with detailed subject matter.
Most of my originals were shot on 4X5 film, so I can easily produce very
high quality enlarged negatives. IMO, the smaller print sizes work well
with simpler, more graphic images.
For the work I do, gum is not suitable for all subject matter. For example,
I have an image of the Passaic River in New Jersey, photographed in the wake
of a snowstorm. Shot on 4X5 B&W film, the photo (as a silver print)
captures incredibly complex detail; thousands of snow-covered branches and
twigs overhanging the river. Although I could print it on gum, I wouldn't,
because the super-fine detail would be degraded. Despite these limitations,
gum, with very careful and exacting printing techniques, will record fine
detail far beyond what 'conventional wisdom' and certain authors may suggest
is possible.
Gum can be "problematical", and I've had my share of failures and learning
experiences. Gum is a highly variable process. Different pigments, papers,
sizing, gums, exposures, ratios, and manipulation during development can
have a profound impact upon the results. After initial testing of six
different papers, I settled on using Rives BFK, sized with gelatin and
hardened with formalin. (I'm not suggesting this is the best paper, just
that it works for me and I know what to expect). I use a gram scale to
weigh dry pigments and professional quality pipettes and beakers to
accurately measure fluids. I've done extensive testing and experimentation
with dozens of pigments, and various ratios of gum, pigment, and sensitizer.
I keep highly detailed notes on every exposure made. By using a precise,
methodical approach, and understanding how the various elements in gum
printing interact, the process can be relatively easy and controllable.
Once the basics are mastered in gum, it's possible to fully take advantage
of the incredible range of image control and manipulation the process
offers. That's when the fun begins and beautiful prints are made.
Best regards,
Dave Rose
Big Wonderful Wyoming
----- Original Message -----
From: <Grafist@aol.com>
To: <alt-photo-process-l@skyway.usask.ca>
Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2002 6:48 AM
Subject: Re: A Process to Suit the Subject
> In a message dated 13/02/02 03:43:43 GMT Standard Time, cactus@tritel.net
> writes:
>
> > Gum, using pigments such as carbon black,
> > indian red, burnt sienna, raw umber, etc.... is exceptionally well
suited
> > for rock art images. The rich earth tones available for use in gum
> printing
> > are such a good match for the actual subject ........
> ............................................
> Hi Cactus, Many thanks for your enthusiastic reply which has got me quite
> intrigued that you seem to be able to manage Gum to your desires while
others
> find it so problematical. One question:- what are the format dimensions of
> your rock Gum prints? I feel I would need to go above 10" X 8" in order
to
> capture the nuances of the natural forms of nature....to bring out or
> highten the designs.
> .............................................
> Hi Catherine, Your work sounds to be very sensitive and subjects ideally
> suited your use of Gum... you write, "Gum is so versatile you can adjust
it
> to any printing
> aesthetic or to any subject whatever." This is a very attractive
concept
> for those new to alternatives to straight silver printing which is quite
easy
> to describe. Just follow the instructions on the box and you **might** get
> acceptable results first time. It seems to me that the problem with Gum is
> that you probably will not experience the same degree of encouragement. I
> remember my very first attempt at contact printing 120 negatives on glossy
> bromide. The bad results were magic, but it had worked as they said it
would
> and I could see what had to be adjusted to improve things. Trying to
instruct
> students in the use of Gum must be a labour of love.
> I am getting a little more interested. Thanks.
> John
>
>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 03/08/02-09:45:21 AM Z CST