From: Jack Brubaker (jack@jackbrubaker.com)
Date: 07/02/03-08:54:23 PM Z
Christina wrote:
Maybe the reason am di gets a bad rap in gum sometimes is people don't
> realize how fast it is, and overexpose, and thus their image gets
> overprinted highlights.
>From my experience in the arts many see their world of art and technique
from an anarcist-selfcentered viewpoint. Most of that is valuable in their
work, but it creates an unrealized desire to reject what ever is the norm.
Ammonium bichromate is the customary sensitizer these days. We all know that
in the past people used other bichromates. So people go off expressing their
individuality by trying and making claims for other sensitizers. The old
literature is full of half-cocked ideas written by semiliterates who want us
to believe how important their work is when it seems their only real claim
is that they did it differently. But since they can't write we aren't even
sure of that. And since the art of printing did not afford them the chance
to illustrate their writing with meaningfull illustrations we cant tell from
the images.
None of the above is criticism of you Chris, only a cautionary about the
value of following all the old formulas one can find. Most are hopelessly
incomplete, unclear, or intentionally misleading.
Thankyou Sandy for the clear comments on sensitizers.
Jack Brubaker
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : 08/07/03-03:34:49 PM Z CST