Re: fresson

[Richard Sullivan <richsul@earthlink.net>]

Bad science Art, asking someone to prove a negative.

--Dick


At 09:35 PM 5/2/2002 -0400, you wrote:

>I rebut your surmised win as you have not presented any data which
>indicates that gum arabic is not present.
>
>The bet still stands . . . data pending.
>
>Sincerely, Art
>
>p.s. Wipe that silly >grin< off your Email.
>
>
>On Thu, 2 May 2002, pete wrote:
>
> > Pete
> >
> > Dick,
> >
> > Yes I was at APIS 97 and Art and I had a bet on whether the traditional
> > Fresson contained Gum  he was going to do some backwards engineering to
> > determine it one way or the other. As I have had no redress I claim my 
> right
> > as the winner >grin<
> >
> > Pete
> >
> > > Pete,
> > >
> > > There were areas that were off limits when I was there. And yes the 
> secret
> > > is in the paper. I believe you were at APIS 97 in Bath, otherwise 
> known as
> > > the Sweatlodge, when Art did his presentation on Fresson. I believe 
> art is
> > > working on the theory of a gum/gelatin mix which is not compatible, thus
> > > making a fine reticulation in the gelatin which aids in direct 
> development.
> > >
> > > --Dick
> > >
> > >
> > > At 06:17 PM 5/2/2002 +0000, you wrote:
> > >> Pete
> > >>
> > >> Argon,
> > >>
> > >> No this was a bit of a red herring I have done an in depth study of this
> > >> process, the secret is in the coating of the paper a secret machine was
> > >> used. The man that has the real secret apart from the Fresson family 
> is Luis
> > >> Nadeau who has/had a machine he bought from Jose Ortis Echague. A 
> picture of
> > >> this machine and Echague operating it can be found  in a book 
> published by
> > >> Gordon Fraser 1979.
> > >>
> > >>> Didn't I once read that part of the Fresson Process involved the 
> use of a
> > >>> sawdust/water slurry to remove the unexposed areas of pigment.  Is 
> that the
> > >>> "secret" that makes the Fresson Print what it is?
> > >>>
> > >>> argon
> > >
> > >
> > >