From: Judy Seigel (jseigel@panix.com)
Date: 11/11/02-01:50:34 AM Z
On Mon, 11 Nov 2002, Steve Bell wrote:
Hi Steve-- what a pleasure to read -- & enjoy vicariously -- your thrill
with the new medium. You will clearly bend it to your needs/wishes ... &
are on the right path, etc. etc.... a couple of comments in case they're
useful..
> alrighty here goes: >
> last night i mixed my first sensitizer solution for Gum printing. this
> morning i woke up and looked outside, and of course it was my luck that it
> was overcast. i was so excited to do my first gum experiments, that i tried
> it anyway. it was a 20 minute exposure, and it was quite underexposed. so i
> dried it, coated the paper again, and of course more bad luck as it started
> raining. i understand that the emulsion deteriorates rapidly, but i'm
> hoping not as rapidly as to make it pointless to try this coated paper
> tomorrow. hopefully it will work.
That's the trouble with kits -- generally speaking it's easiest and best
just to mix up the amount of emulsion you'll use right off. Say 20 DROPS
of gum arabic and 20 DROPS of dichromate to cover a 5 by 7 or whatever.
Once the ingredients are combined they do change -- but if it's not too
warm & you've kept them from light, they're probably usable. But kits !!!
Feh !! For the cost of 2 kits you get lifetime supply of gum and
dichromate.
> my first print/emulsion solution was done according to and with the Photog
> Formulary kit. in the kit, they include directions for shrinking and sizing
> the paper. the sizing is done with a gelatin and glyoxal solution. is this
> the only way to size paper? i don't want to get too picky, but i try not to
> consume animal products. i realize that gelatin is used in so many
> photographic processes, so i've come to terms with the fact that it's hard
> to avoid. but it would be nice to avoid it when possible. if not, so be it.
Odds are almost any paper you buy will already have some gelatin in it (as
does almost everything else you buy, from pills to food to whatever). But
if you're not doing too many coats, some papers (like Rives BFK) can go
without added size, or try diluted liquitex gesso (like one to 9 -- I
can't bear it, but if you're going for broad effects can be good)
Or acrylic medium 1 to 9. (Just think of all the acrylics they killed to
make that, and read NY Times mag for Sunday about animals)... Or a starch
size, which is probably in the James book. Gives a grainy texture which is
kind of nice...
> one thing i am interested in doing regarding gum prints is including
> newsprint. i want somehow for the newprint to be embedded in the image. one
> of the series that i plan on doing will be one of baltimore. i really love
> this city, and i want to show the world how i see it. i think gum will let
> me do this. so i want to include newsprint from local papers. kind of
> collages within the image that add some text to identify the area in
> which/of which the image was made. i was thinking i could embed this
> newsprint during the sizing process by laying the newsprint down and then
> coating the paper with the sizing solution. will this work? i'm thinking
> the majority of respones i get will be 'try it and see', but i figured i
> would send a message to see if anyone has any experience, that might have
> some useful information.
You're absolutely right you can do nearly anything you can think of with
gum, but if you put enough sizing material over the newsprint, it might
not take the emulsion -- try adding alcohol, which helps it grab, or Tween
20. But permit old fuddy duddy to suggest doing it *straight* or
straighter at least for a while, before going out on a limb... otherwise
you don't know which are the medium's limits & which are your beginner's
limits, & can mistake one for the other & learn wrong.
> also regarding negatives. what are the best negatives to use? i'm scanning
> my prints and making negative transparencies in photoshop. the printer i'm
> using is an HP Photosmart. i forget the number of it, maybe 7550? something
Steve, if you're going to work on top of newsprint, the fine points of
negatives are irrelevant. But in any event, there's no *best* of anything
with any medium, let alone gum. there's what works best for a
practitioner, and attitudes vary. IMO scanning prints is a GREAT way to
get negatives... a derivation !
> with a 7. it's my parents' printer and really the only one i have access
> to, so if it isn't top of line, i don't really have much choice. i'm on a
> budget. anyway, should the negatives be on the denser side of things? of
> course i understand that this process it extremely trial and error, and i'm
> willing to be patient, but any information would be wonderful.
If you want to do one-coat gum, then the negative should have no more
steps of density than you can print in one coat. Do you have a Stouffer
21-step? That's essential. costs $5.40. Print it & develop & you know
how many steps you can get & make negative accordingly. If you want to do
multi-coat gum, you can do any neg that's not bullet proof -- in stages,
or layers.
I want to say what joy, but that's too gooey, so I say only ENJOY !
Judy
>
> i think that pretty much sums things up.
>
> thanks in advance,
>
> Steve
>
> PS- i would like to formally apologize and thank all of you who responded
> and gave me advice on schools. i didn't get a chance to respond to
> everyone, and hopefully this en masse expression of gratitude isn't too
> impersonal. this weekend i'm going to NY and Boston to visit a couple of
> schools and next weekend i will be heading to Chicago. So wish me luck,
> hopefully i will find one i like and successfully apply. thanks again.
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : 12/17/02-04:47:04 PM Z CST