From: Richard Sullivan (richsul@earthlink.net)
Date: 03/13/03-09:19:41 PM Z
Yes that is correct. Stuart is working mostly in straight gum not gum over.
--Dick
At 04:49 PM 3/13/2003 -0700, you wrote:
>If I understand it correctly, the work Stewart and Kerik are doing with
>gum is a technique they have been working on over the last few months. I
>think it's straight gum too, not over PT.
>
>mateo
>
>
>On Thursday, March 13, 2003, at 04:06 PM, Dave Rose wrote:
>
>>After re-reading Stuart Melvin's article in the July/August 2001 issue of
>>View Camera magazine, I don't understand why it's considered "new ground
>>work". His gum printing procedure is about as straightforward and
>>'traditional' as any I've ever seen. Gum over platinum is hardly a novel
>>idea. It was done many, many years ago. Edward Steichen's "The Flatiron",
>>1905, is a good example of an early gum over platinum.
>>
>>Am I unaware of radical new discoveries in gum or combination gum/platinum
>>printing that Melvin has made since 2001?
>>
>>My comments are in no way intended to diminish or dismiss Mr. Melvin's work.
>>Based on the reproductions in View Camera, he's clearly producing some
>>exciting and beautiful work. I just don't see how his printing procedure is
>>new or different enough to warrant consideration of a new name.
>>
>>Best regards,
>>Dave Rose
>>Big Wonderful Wyoming
>>
>>
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: "Richard Sullivan" <richsul@earthlink.net>
>>To: <alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca>
>>Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2003 9:43 AM
>>Subject: The Holy Grail
>>
>>(snip)
>>"I find it exciting that people like you Pete, are developing new processes.
>>Yours is really a "gum" based process but sufficiently different enough to
>>have a new name. The new ground work Melvin is doing is also phenomenal and
>>though it is traditional "gum" in the basics, it too may deserve a new
>>name."
>>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : 04/22/03-02:37:25 PM Z CST