From: Katharine Thayer (kthayer@pacifier.com)
Date: 06/12/03-03:53:42 AM Z
Devra Goldberg wrote:
>
>
> next on my list was gum. i've been working on gum for
> two months now and have yet to produce a decent print,
> with one possible exception. i don't know if this is
> a result of poor sizing, bad paper choice, or
> negatives, but i'm at my wit's end. i've seen
> properly done prints and i'm enchanted and determined
> but by now i am also PISSED OFF. :-)
>
> i started off using potassium dichromate (5ml), gum
> arabic (liquid, from photoformulary) (5ml), and ~1in
> of winston and newton watercolor pigments on soaked,
> but not sized, charcoal paper and got fantastic color
> saturation but a lot of staining and, of course, a lot
> of shrinking (i also have yet to figure out a good
> registration method).
>
> so then i started with different sizings, keeping the
> same STEM. first, i used egg white as per jill
> enfield's book and had contrast issues. way too much
> contrast. ditto for straight up knox gelatine.
>
> i finally discussed this with an old teacher of mine
> and he gave me some paper he sized using knox and
> formalin (but i'm wary of using formalin or glyoxal).
> this paper works beautifully, and it is with this and
> a modified STEM formula (christopher james' thinner
> formula: 10ml gum, 10ml distilled water, 5ml
> dichromate, and ~1in of pigment) that i have had some
> luck. i'd still like, however, to master this issue
> of sizing.
>
> my next question regards using fixed-out photo paper
> as a suppor. i've seen this recommended for gum
> printing and also for oil printing and i've been
> interested in trying it with temperaprinting because
> it seems to elminiate the issue of paper soaking up
> the emulsion. when fixed-out photo paper is
> recommended (or used), should i try RC or fiber base?
> what processes, if any, is it an actual appropriate
> support for?
>
> i've seen some discussion in the archives about the
> use of digital paper negatives and i've been
> intrigued. what, exactly, does this mean? is it
> easier than dealing with transparencies? (i'm
> anxiously awaiting the arrival of dan burkholder's
> book in today's UPS shipment.)
>
Hi Devra,
You've given us a lot to chew on, and I only have time to bite off a
couple of pieces of it. A few thoughts, in random order:
I wouldn't recommend charcoal paper for gum printing. Nor would I
recommend fixed-out photo paper.
A digital paper negative is a digital negative printed on paper rather
than on transparency material. If you have an older printer or a printer
that doesn't print well on transparencies, printing on paper can be an
acceptable substitute for gum. Most people oil or wax these negatives to
increase transparency; if you're planning to do this I would stay away
from clay-coated papers unless you're planning to print immediately and
never use the negative again, as over time this combination of clay and
wax or oil tends to develop cracks and fissures.
Depending on the paper, paper negatives tend to be a little softer than
film negatives. I like that for some types of images.
Pete Frederick is here, if he's not in Spain already for the summer, and
can answer all your questions on temperarint. Good luck!
Katharine Thayer
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : 07/09/03-08:31:13 AM Z CST