From: Breukel, C (HKG) (cor@lumc.nl)
Date: 07/03/02-01:34:27 AM Z
Judy Seigel wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2 Jul 2002, Breukel, C (HKG) wrote:
>
> > Gum print was aimed at "filling in" the higlights: mixture 0.5 ml gum,
> > 0.02 gram (!, long live the micro balans) Burnt Sienna and 0,5 ml
> > PotDichromate.
> >
> > (BTW I realy wonder how people can maintain registration: even after a
> > pre-shrink step, and using only 4*5 I could not obtain perfect
> > registration)
>
> Cor, I'm not familiar with the Fonteney paper you mention -- but I gather
> you didn't preshrink it.
..Judy,
I ofcourse did pre-shrunk (per PF instructions).., but I tested a
size/hardening in one step (solute gelatine 1.4%, than boil it with 1
gram Alum per 500 ml, cool down and brush it on the paper).
But in my previous gum over kallitype I did the seizing with gelatine
and the hardening with Glyxoal as a seperate steps, and still had no
perfect register for a 18*24 cm negative, both on Canson Fonteney and
Arches Aquarelle.. (..random thought: perhaps the registration is harder
when printing 2 different processes on top of each other?..)
Btw I also tried a pre-shrink without seizing afterwards, and could
actually print nicely 3-5 gum coats on it, without clearing problems!
But the first Kallitype "layer" gave problems! It appears that the first
kalli actually needs a gelatine seize, else the highlights stain..
BTW2: it is probably worth noting that the dichromate in the gum mixture
did NOT bleach away the silver image of the Kallitype: Simple theory:
the silver image is more in the paper fibers, wheras the gum layer
stastays more "on top" of the paper fibers..
Best,
Cor
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : 09/19/02-11:11:00 AM Z CST