From: Clay Harmon (wcharmon@wt.net)
Date: 11/15/02-09:17:36 AM Z
On Friday, November 15, 2002, at 08:54 AM, Richard Sullivan wrote:
> Hmm.. I thought you weren't even sposed to say you knew. Oh well.
Know what?
>
> Stuart is gonna tell all, its only fair he gets first publication
> rights to it.
Absolutely. I did get permission to let people look at my prints ;-)
>
> Yes there is something to look forwards to.
>
> I find it interesting that there are several contracts out for
> historical negatives to be printed in gum-over platinum. As little as
> 3 years ago gum over was only a blip on the platinum radar. Ever since
> Stuart went public with it at APIS 2001 and his article in View Camera
> it has taken off and from our perspective her at B+S it has become
> more or less a standard process. At least standard enough that some
> archives are looking for re strikes in the gum over medium.
You do a few, and all your old platinum prints start to look a little
anemic...
Clay
>
>
> --Dick
>
>
>
>
>
> At 03:32 PM 11/14/2002 -0600, you wrote:
>> Well, I gotta confess that I've been let in on parts of the secret
>> (under
>> pain-of-death if I reveal it). I've been using the 'new' gum for
>> about a
>> month, and yes, it rocks. Stuart SHOULD be smiling. Its pretty
>> interesting.
>> So far, I've been using it mostly for gum-over work, but it excels at
>> that
>> as well, and makes them much easier to do in a single coat. I feel I
>> should
>> do some tub-thumping for Stuart's new approach. He's really onto
>> something.
>> Stay tuned. Mysterious ingredients and hardware store trips all
>> figure into
>> the story.....
>>
>> Clay
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Richard Sullivan" <richsul@earthlink.net>
>> To: <alt-photo-process-l@skyway.usask.ca>
>> Sent: Thursday, November 14, 2002 3:17 PM
>> Subject: Stuart again on gum
>>
>>
>> > Clay,
>> >
>> > I believe you saw some of Stuart Melvin's gums and gum-overs either
>> at
>> > Platypus or at the ABQ View Camera Conference. They were quite jaw
>> dropping
>> > to say the least, as an old time traditional gum printer myself, I
>> was
>> dumb
>> > struck.
>> >
>> > Stuart was by the factory the other day and was quite excited, he
>> was
>> > really beside himself as he said he has made another discovery
>> about gum
>> > printing and says this one tops the others. If I can describe it
>> correctly
>> > he has found a way to add as much pigment as you want without
>> flaking or
>> > staining. He thought he had stumbled on a rather stunning new
>> discovery.
>> > Now Stuart is a pretty calm fellow and this time he was grinning
>> from ear
>> > to ear. Having seen his earlier work one would have to take Stuart
>> at his
>> > word.
>> >
>> > A N D... he is finally writing a book. He says his plans are for
>> February
>> > of 2003 for publication. We will have it as soon as it is ready.
>> >
>> > I'd also like to put in a plug for Stephen Livick one of the modern
>> masters
>> > of the gum print: www.livick.com Stephen sparked the flames of some
>> of the
>> > new innovators in gum by teaching a B+S online class several years
>> ago.
>> >
>> > There is much to be said for the traditional gum print but I for
>> one am
>> > excited to see folks like Stuart venture off and improve the breed
>> so to
>> > speak. Bostick & Sullvian is now well into its 3rd decade of
>> existence and
>> > for the first 2 decades most everything was based on 100 year old
>> > technology. People, myself included, were slavish over doing this
>> the
>> > "right" way was which was the traditional way. Now we are seeing new
>> > innovations in the alt processes and a sure sign that in this
>> digital age
>> > the genre is alive and well.
>> >
>> > B+S just bought another 1800 sq ft building to complement our
>> existing
>> 2500
>> > sq ft one. The new one is across the street and will be the Carbon
>> Annex.
>> > We too are alive and well.
>> >
>> >
>> > --Dick Sullivan
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > At 08:11 AM 11/14/2002 -0600, you wrote:
>> >
>> > >Temi:
>> > >
>> > >I'm a relative newbie to gum, but after a year of lurking on the
>> list and
>> > >doing some gums and gumovers, my sense is that most people on the
>> list
>> are
>> > >probably using gelatin to size their prints. I too was looking for
>> > >something 'easier' than gelatin, and tried PVA, acrylic and some
>> other
>> > >'packaged' solutions. None worked as well as gelatin, and I have
>> found
>> > >that real gelatin is just not that hard to manage, once you do it
>> a few
>> > >times. I mix up quantities as small as 125ml, coat a few sheets
>> and then
>> > >toss it. I use the 'Livick' one step sizing formula with glyoxal
>> and it
>> > >seems to work just fine. I'm not trying to convince you one way or
>> the
>> > >other, but just propose a possible reason for the lack of
>> responses.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >Clay
>> > >
>> > >On Thursday, November 14, 2002, at 07:43 AM, Temi wrote:
>> > >
>> > >>Good Morning, Since I did not receive any replies to the message
>> below,
>> > >>I decided to resend in case it got lost with the many email that
>> come
>> > >>each day. Temi
>> > >>
>> > >>-----Original Message-----
>> > >>From: Temi
>> > >>Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2002 8:45 PM
>> > >>To: alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca
>> > >>Subject: GUM - STARCH - ?????
>> > >>
>> > >>Hello,
>> > >>If instead of using a gelatin size when making gum dichromate
>> prints, I
>> > >>use a spray starch before coating, would it be best or necessary
>> to
>> > >>re-spray with starch between layered coats of the gum?
>> > >>Thanks for your advise.
>> > >>Temi
>> > >
>> >
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : 12/17/02-04:47:05 PM Z CST