Re: Gambi Trainwreck II

[Clay Harmon <wcharmon@wt.net>]

Jeff:

I have VERY limited experience with the stuff, but I found it helpful to
just do all of the processing in a single tray to avoid handling it. I just
would pour developer over it, drain, rinse very gently, clear, rinse, clear,
rinse, wash, and then just sort of float it out of the tray onto the drying
screen I removed from the rack. I do remember some blotchiness that went
away also. It handles like wet toilet paper, or at least that's what I
understand wet toilet paper handles like from what people tell me. The whole
process seemed sort of like building a 1/4 scale Eiffel tower out of
toothpicks, so I never did more than a few prints. Short attention span.

Clay

on 5/19/02 7:40 PM, Jeff Buckels at jeffbuck@swcp.com wrote:

> Well, the interest in this is plainly limited but I gotta make an addendum
> for the sake of accuracy:  So, this Gampi image looked awful on the drying
> rack, what w/ all the splotching I wrote about.  Well, that stuff, I dunno,
> just dried away.  Issues remain, but not that one....  This Gampi is very
> delicate indeed when wet.  Really easy to create creases.  On the dry print,
> these creases are arguably cool-looking, but will try double hard to avert
> same next session.  -jb
> 
> Jeff Buckels wrote:
> 
>> Hi List:  Anybody use Gambi paper much?  Just got a few sheets each of
>> white and natural.  Pulled out a negative tried and tested pr,eviously on
>> Platine and Lenox.  A 5x7.  Applied 8 drops straight ferric ox, 4 @ of
>> pt and pd, .5 drop of Tween 20.  Coating w/ Magic Brush seemed
>> uneventful.  Developed out in potassium ox w/ #2 grade of 50% sod.
>> dichromate.  No light to talk about for first minute of development.
>> Shortly after I turned the light on, small dark spots came up pretty
>> quickly and pretty uniformly over entire surface of the print.  These
>> "smoothed out" in the course of wet processing into fainter, all-over
>> splotchiness.  What the ... ?  -jeff buckels
>