From: Katharine Thayer (kthayer@pacifier.com)
Date: 07/26/03-04:45:24 AM Z
I hate it when I have to contradict myself, but I am going to concede to
Judy and Dave on this point. I've said that I believe any
artist-quality lines should work; what I should have said is that all
the brands I have tried have worked, but I haven't tried all the brands,
and it would be unreasonable to disagree with folks who have experience
with brands I haven't tried. As I said in another post, the context was
Stephen Livick insisting that only one or two brands work for gum
printing; I was trying to make the point that actually many brands work
just fine. I was trying to help would-be gum printers understand that
the world would not come to an end if they couldn't get Linel paints
from France. I think we're just coming at the question from opposite
ends: I was arguing against the precious nonsense that says ONLY one or
two brands will work and all the rest don't. The question of whether
there are ANY brands that don't work is an overlapping question, but not
quite the same question.
The source I trust most on pigments agrees with Dave about Sennelier, by
the way.
Katharine
Judy Seigel wrote:
>
> On Fri, 25 Jul 2003, Katharine Thayer wrote:
>
> > Richard Sullivan wrote:
> > >
> > > One thing that Stuart said that goes counter to much popular opinion is
> > > that any brand of pigment works. I found that interesting.
> > >
> > > --Dick Sullivan
> >
> > In fact, the only person I know of who teaches that precious nonsense
> > about brand being all-important is Stephen Livick.
>
> I cannot believe that after only two days of absenteeism I found something
> like 165 new messages from the list -- and am now only at about the
> hundred mark.... Of course it's unwise to reply before reading all, but
> clearly some points (about gum anyway) don't seem to sink in no matter how
> often you make them...
>
> Although I heartily agree with Katharine's comments of Wednesday ("the
> fact is that detailed gum prints with clarity and > gradation are NOT
> rarely seen in gum, and to say so tends to stick in> the craw of gum
> printers who have been making such prints for years,") & expect to add
> some comment at the 165 mark, on the matter of paint brands I think a
> footnote is in order now.
>
> Having taught gum for many years to undergraduates who WILL buy whatever
> paints are cheap, or have a nice box, or a suggestive name, or somebody
> once used, or whatever wherever they happen to find them (the Netherlands,
> Korea, South Carolina), I can attest that there are brands that do not not
> not NOT work.... Generally these are not the major international brands
> (Winsor Newton, Rowney, etc., and now Daniel Smith) tho there are
> certainly differences in the way even major brands work, my prime example
> being the VERY weak pigment density in a Rowney quinacridone red by some
> other name). But offbrands tend to have additives (I suspect dispersal
> agents) that make gum printing not work, and there are (usually by price)
> differences in amount of actual pigment vs. fillers.
>
> Tho there is the Niji brand -- very small tubes made in Japan that sell
> very cheap (about $4 for 18 colors in the school store). For whatever
> reason, although print makers say they're terrible, they're great for gum
> -- coat & clear beautifully. They are NOT an economy, because they're
> weak, and many of the colors are not usable or effective for gum.... But
> they let the student start with a full palette for less than the cost of
> one 15 ml tube of a major brand. And since the free use of color is one of
> the joys & gifts of gum, I think on balance they're a real plus for
> beginners. No list of "approved" colors, which can be very limiting.
>
> Though I guess I should add that it's a few years since I used them, so
> maybe they have (like everything else) changed in the interim.
>
> Judy
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : 08/07/03-03:34:50 PM Z CST