From: Judy Seigel (jseigel@panix.com)
Date: 03/05/03-11:47:50 PM Z
On Wed, 5 Mar 2003, Jack Brubaker wrote:
> I don't know Judy. I only have always had the too slick size show up when
> printing the first layer of gum.
Is that the "fish eyes" people are talking about? I don't think I've seen
that, in fact I thought that was only tapioca pudding ("fish eyes and
glue," although nobody seems to make tapioca pudding any more either)...
It could be from hand application of size, so it puddles. I've never
seen it with traditional tray gelatin size... although you probably could
if you let it get too cool. But I thought you were talking about later
coats.
Incidentally, that shampoo your grandmother used could be a lot like
fotoflo or even detergent which have been recommended for later coats when
there's too much buildup underneath --- I find Tween 20 better than any...
tho the problem is rare -- only when I'm asking for trouble.
Still, one might want to abrade at ANY point -- in areas. Sometimes I've
decided a later coat had to go and didn't want to take it all off, just
areas. Usually a little brushing or spraying does that. But maybe the
Scotch Brite could take it right down to the paper base again... keeping
more options open, at least in theory. I sometimes clear back to the
paper base with chlorox, but then you have to resize.
J.
> ...I did use the scotch-brite to rub down the
> surface of a finished print that had some gum layers more glossy than
> others. Gentle rubbing matted the gloss out of the offending areas without
> effecting tonal strength (they were not thin tones however). I use
> scotch-brite a lot in my metal work so always have worn pads to use when I
> want a very gentle action. I think your point is well taken that if there
> are delicate layers of gum on the image and one trys to abrate through a
> fresh wet gum emulsion the gum under it will be softened by the wet emulsion
> and could be damaged. But I'm not sure why you would want to be abrating at
> that point anyway...if there are usable layers on the print I assume the
> emulsion is bonding well without abrating. Perhaps your thinking of
> fish-eyes that form over fingerprints or other contaminated that have
> settled on the print surface. Then a little tween-20 may be the best
> recourse (my grand mother taught me to put a bit of shampoo in my watercolor
> if that happened).
>
> Jack
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : 04/22/03-02:37:24 PM Z CST