Judy Seigel wrote:
>
> When I began testing for gum (more years ago than I have actually been
> alive) it was popular in the (then) new manuals to suggest dilute acrylic
> medium or dilute acrylic gesso (liquitex) as substitute for the gelatin
> size - as being much quicker and easier.
>
> When I tested with a 21-step I found that as size *for gum printing* none
> of them in any dilution worked as well as gelatin for paper size -- for
> continuous tone.
>
> They simply did NOT do smooth highlights AT ALL.
Hi All,
This morning I've printed test prints and 21-steps on the following
sizings on Arches Bright White paper: (1) PVA-glue 1:10 (2) gloss
acrylic medium 1:10, and (3) gelatin with glyoxal, with the following
results (with a continuous tone negative and the same coating mix, a
rather heavily-pigmented greenish black, and same exposure for all):
The gelatin-glyoxal gave the smoothest gradations, but the fewest tones
(5); it was very smooth but very high-contrast, with few midtones and no
highlight tones at all.
The PVA gave a few more tones than the gelatin, but there was serious
mottling in the shadow areas of the gum.
The acrylic medium printed all the tones in the negative, from shadows
to highlights; the gradations were a bit less smooth than the gradations
on gelatin, but the print overall *looked* better because it was a fully
tonal print. The 21-steps show no relation to the actual print, which is
why I don't use step wedges to determine anything about printing.
These are all still wet but if I have time this afternoon I'll scan them
after they are dry.
Katharine
Received on Fri Aug 5 12:32:42 2005
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 09/01/05-09:17:19 AM Z CST