Re: Rethinking pigment stain

Well, I'm still going back and forth about this. I spent last evening
re-writing my page on pigment stain to reflect a broadened definition
of "pigment stain" including the tonal reversal as a special case, but
you're right, there is that odd place where the paper is white, that is
difficult to explain. Explaining it as fog doesn't work for me,
because when I cut the coated paper in half and put half directly into
water, I got the same pigment tone on that half as I got in the
unexposed areas on the exposed half of the paper. To me, that's more
like stain, and looks to be a function of excess pigment, even though
it's not stain in the way I always defined stain before, as an
indelible staining of the paper, because the sizing keeps it from
actually sinking into the paper. I've only seen this effect with this
one particular pigment mix (burnt umber) and don't have time to
investigate it further, but I agree it's a puzzling effect.
Katharine

On Dec 14, 2005, at 8:25 AM, Joe Smigiel wrote:

> Jack, et. al.,
>
> Works for me...
>
> I just wish I had a clue as to what was causing the shift. I wonder
> how
> many past prints I tossed because somewhere in the sequence of printing
> a multilayer gum I inadvertantly introduced this reversal shift and
> later thought it was an inexplicable random effect, that I didn't live
> right, or was a bad person, etc. Glad to clear that all up.
>
> I'll be vary wary of using any black or neutral tint until I test it
> for
> this effect.
>
> Joe
> ___
>
>
>>>> jack@jackbrubaker.com 12/14/05 10:53 AM >>>
> Joe,
>
> I think your definitions of fog and stain make sense in gum and are
> consistent in other media. I agree we need a term for the effect you
> describe below. How about calling it what it does (since we don't know
> what
> it is caused by). Using your words, "reversal shift" would seem to be
> a
> clear enough term for what is apparently a uniquely gum problem. Or
> perhaps
> "gum reversal shift" to make clear that it is just for gum.
>
> Jack
>
>> From: Joe Smigiel <jsmigiel@kvcc.edu>
>> Reply-To: alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca
>> Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2005 22:36:20 -0500
>> To: alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca
>> Subject: Re: Rethinking pigment stain
>>
>> The
>> reversed areas shift about depending on the level of exposure, yet
> there
>> seems to be an intermediate exposure that leaves the paper white
> without
>> pigment stain. It does not appear to be a random effect although I
>> can't explain it.
>>
>> Perhaps there would be a better term than "fog" to describe it, but in
>> my opinion, it is not "stain."
>
>
Received on Wed Dec 14 11:19:57 2005