From: Craig Zammiello (zamm@optonline.net)
Date: 11/09/02-12:47:45 PM Z
----- Original Message -----
From: Sandy King <sanking@clemson.edu>
To: <alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca>
Sent: Saturday, November 09, 2002 10:16 AM
Subject: Re: Woodburytypes
> Craig,
>
> The distinction you make relating to depth/relief is not valid, for
> two reasons. One is that not all Woodburtypes show the kind of relief
> you describe, and on the other hand, 2) many carbon prints do show
> the kind of relief you attribute only to the Woodburtype. With both
> carbon and Woodburytype relief depends on a number of factors. the
> thickness the tissue used to make the mold or the print, how heavily
> pigmented it was, and the contrast of the negative used to make the
> print, and the nature of the final support paper
Sandy,
Thanks for clarifying these points. I stand corrected and at the same time
learned a great deal. You have obviously seen a lot more Woodburytypes then
I have. I guess what I would like to achieve is along the lines of the few
examples I have seen. That's the look I'm after, and I did not realize
Carbon printing was capable of this intensity.
I have observed the "dirty" highlights, and find them a bit charming, thanks
for explaining what causes them.
Again Sandy, if you come across the hard copy of what you have on
Woodburytypes, I would be very grateful.
Cheers, Craig Z.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : 12/17/02-04:47:04 PM Z CST