From: STUART GOLDSTEIN (email_stuart@yahoo.com)
Date: 09/05/03-09:06:10 AM Z
Clay,
Can't answer your question about staining, but I have
some (limited) information about using gouache.
Before I bought paints for gum, I contacted W+N about
using designer gouache. I got to speak to their
paint/pigment expert (she was painter). She told me
that the designer gouache has a tendency to fade. For
designers this isn't a problem because after they make
the presentation to a client they eventually throw the
art work out. Over time....?
Again, this was for designer gouache.
Stuart
--- Clay <wcharmon@wt.net> wrote:
>
> And while we're on the subject of gum, I've got an
> itch to try some
> single coat gums on some old silver-gelatin
> negatives, and wondered if
> anyone had a good watercolor pigment recommendation
> that will give a
> reasonable amount of density without a lot of
> staining. Is gouache the
> way to go here? Any kinds to avoid?
>
> Clay
> On Thursday, September 4, 2003, at 02:01 PM,
> Katharine Thayer wrote:
> > Sometime this summer I tried one of those white
> rollers for gum, just
> > out of curiosity, and found the results inferior
> to plain old hake
> > brushes. I made several test prints, first with
> my usual mix, then
> > with
> > a mix using dry dichromate, gently rolled on with
> the white foam
> > roller
> > following the description that was given after
> APIS. For one of these
> > dry-dichromate prints I used no water at all; for
> the others I used
> > varying small amounts of water. In every case, the
> roller-coated print
> > came out blotchy and mottled, quite
> unsatisfactory, while the print
> > made
> > by my usual method came out clear and smooth as
> usual. I scanned two of
> > the prints and then decided not to post them, but
> if anyone's
> > interested
> > in seeing the comparison, let me know and I'll put
> them up on Bostick &
> > Sullivan.
> >
> > I've often said that there are about as many
> different gum printing
> > methods as there are gum printers; this is yet
> another example of that
> > truth. What works for one doesn't always, or
> often, work for others
> > using different materials or equipment; that's
> why attempts to set out
> > magic recipes for gum printing are forever doomed
> to failure.
> >
> > Someone (Judy maybe?) suggested, back when we were
> discussing all this,
> > that it may be that Stuart's method wouldn't
> generalize beyond the
> > particular gum that he uses. My experiment
> suggests that this may well
> > be so.
> >
> > It may be, of course, that in order for the method
> to work, the Miracle
> > Muck is essential. I personally don't see any need
> to add extra
> > ingredients when the basic formula works so well.
> But, like I always
> > say, each to his own.
> >
> > Katharine Thayer
> >
>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : 10/01/03-03:08:59 PM Z CST