Re: gum printing color combinations

In other words, what distinguishes "semi-opaque" from
"semi-transparent" pigments for me is that semi-transparent pigments
don't have enough opacity to dull or cloud the transparency of the gum
layer, and semi-opaque pigments do. Hope that's clearer,
Katharine

On Dec 22, 2005, at 10:41 AM, Katharine Thayer wrote:

>
> On Dec 22, 2005, at 8:19 AM, Christina Z. Anderson wrote:
>
>>
>> transparent to semi-transparent to semi-opaque to opaque...and the
>> manufacturer's designations are iffy...hmmmm...so where are you
>> drawing the line in your own practice between semitransparent and
>> semiopaque or doesn't it really matter?
>
> No, I think it does matter, to me. I would (and sometimes do) use
> what I would call semitransparent pigments in tricolor, but wouldn't
> use what I would call semi-opaque pigments for that purpose, because I
> like a more transparent tricolor. So maybe for me there are really
> only two major divisions: opaque (which includes totally and
> semi-opaque) and transparent (which includes totally and
> semi-transparent). So for me in my own practice the line is drawn
> between semi-opaque and semi-transparent, as I define them. I would
> choose a semi-opaque pigment for a monochrome that I wouldn't choose
> for a tricolor, for example.
>
>
>>
>> For instance, M Graham PY110 and Maimeri PY139 are the exact color,
>> except for a slight opacity to PY139. Exposed, PY139 has a slight
>> dullness in comparison to exposed PY110, but you can still see
>> clearly through it. It is termed "semi-opaque". In gum practice I
>> would call it semi-transparent...
>
> I don't think I've ever owned PY 139, so I don't know from personal
> experience whether I would call it semi-transparent or semi-opaque.
> (And I've already made clear that I make my own determinations from
> how it prints for me rather than taking the word of a manufacturer or
> another rater about what to call the pigment.) But taking your
> description that it has a slight dullness to it when printed, I would
> probably call it semi-opaque and wouldn't use it for tricolor. It's
> all a matter of what kind of look you want in a print. I don't
> personally care for that dull "partly cloudy" look that opaque
> pigments impart to a tricolor, but, for the gazillionth time, it's
> purely a personal preference.
>
>> On the way to the movie store last night I realized that I THINK that
>> partly sunny really means mostly cloudy and partly cloudy really
>> means mostly sunny.
>
> And to my mind, semi-opaque really means mostly opaque and
> semi-transparent really means mostly transparent, which is more
> straightforward.
>
> Katharine
>
>
>>
>>> On Dec 20, 2005, at 10:22 AM, Christina Z. Anderson wrote:
>>>> I realized that a lot of judgments on pigment (opacity,
>>>> transparency, color bias, etc.) aren't as critical in gum because
>>>> you dilute the pigment in a gum arabic vehicle.
>>> On Dec 21, 2005, at 4:43 PM, Christina Z. Anderson wrote:
>>>> I did determine that cadmium red, which I don't use anyway as a
>>>> general rule, is not that great. Its opacity makes for a dull
>>>> final layer,
>>>
>>> Like I said, it's a matter of personal preference, how much
>>> attention you pay to fine distinctions in transparency/opacity
>>> between pigments. But the transparent/opaque distinctions I make
>>> between pigments are distinctions that I have personally noticed and
>>> made use of in gum printing, so for me at least, the fact that
>>> pigments are diluted with gum in gum printing is already taken into
>>> account when I make distinctions of transparency/opacity between
>>> pigments. But like I've said a million times, I'm not here to impose
>>> my preferences on anyone, only to tell you what works for me. Paying
>>> attention to this characteristic of pigments works for me. Peace
>>> to All, and Season's Greetings to All,
>>> Katharine
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
Received on Thu Dec 22 13:00:28 2005