From: Judy Seigel (jseigel@panix.com)
Date: 09/10/03-02:37:35 PM Z
On Wed, 10 Sep 2003, Katharine Thayer wrote:
> As to whether gouache is the best way to go for one-coat gums, this is a
> matter of taste. I'm starting to see, as a result of watching
> discussions here, that some people apparently equate density with
> opacity; they think they haven't achieved sufficient density in gum
> unless no light comes through the paint from the paper at all; they want
> a flat dead tone like a graphic arts poster. To me density and opacity
> are two different things. You can have density without opacity (which I
> prefer) or opacity without density (with a light-colored gouache, for
> example). If you want opacity, with or without density, use gouache; if
> you want density without opacity, use watercolor.
I myself haven't noticed any call for a "flat dead tone like a graphic
art's poster" (which these days is likely to have half-tones anyway).
And suspect that the meaning of both "opacity" & "density" changes
depending on whether you mean by transmission or reflection. D-max may
anyway be a more useful term here. ...To wander into Mortensen territory,
he points out that both "black" and "white" points are relative. In a
print of a very high key,for instance, the darkest dark can be little more
than a midtone, yet function as 'black.' (And similarly,in many
pictorialist prints, the lightest highlight is no more than a high
midtone.)
However in my experience, satisfying one-coat gums are of various types &
strategies. For instance, pure watercolor in a green, red + black mix
made one of my favorite prints -- but it was on a shrunk NOT SIZED sheet
of Buxton, which it so happens holds more pigment than any other paper
combo I've tried. (And hooray, I've just scored 7 new sheets of old
Buxton!!!)
I don't think most gummists hold the print up to the light to judge it --
or none I know of. (Tho that's an early test for coating -- they said you
should be able to see through the unexposed coat to newspaper or your
fingers beneath).It's going to be viewed anyway on an opaque backing. So
any "light" won't be by transmission, but the white (or other tone) of the
paper itself. That is, it's a factor of the paper & the type of coat.
Because, as has been noted, the life of a gum print comes from the tiny
twinkle of white interstices - the paper showing through the emulsion. If
that's gone -- I suppose you CAN get a lively print, but I think it has a
different character & has lost more than gained.
I'd also guess that so-called gouache paint comes in all sorts of types &
admixtures; whether we call it "density" or "opacity" is more semantic
than practical. I'll add that one of the most delightful prints from any
of my students came from a waxed paper negative printed in purple gouache,
one coat. Which in fact alerted me to the possibilities of gouache. (I was
a very new teacher & had warned against gouache. In retrospect, I learned
the most from *bad* students, who do something they're not supposed to.)
> A good density for one-coat gum can be achieved with many watercolor
> pigments or mixtures thereof. What I do is mix complements to make
> darks, just as I do in painting
> Katharine
I'd agree about mixing coats for one-coat from watercolor pigments (as per
my article "Serious One-Coat Gum," P-F #6), tho aside from paper,
exposure, mix, choice of pigment, etc., an important variable is the
negative match. For one coat you generally need to match the scale of the
negative to the scale of the emulsion (which can be adjusted more by
varying exposure/development than is generally credited).
I'd meant to note, BTW, re INDIGO, which has extreme covering power, that
it's no longer a pigment, but a mix of pigments (usually 3 if I recall
correctly). which escape me now, but no matter -- I have 3 different
indigos (W-N, Rowney, Dan'l Smith) and all are a different *color* whether
made from the same nominal pigments or not.
As for getting darks by mixing complements -- that was Van Gogh's
"secret," or anyway his modus operandi, but in my experience doesn't
always give best dark for gum.
Judy
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : 10/01/03-03:09:00 PM Z CST