Re: varnishes for alt and the elusive soehnee

On Wed, 28 Dec 2005, Mark MacKenzie wrote:
> I have never heard of the elusive vernis "soehnee" but am fascinated as of
> this moment.

I've heard of it twice, the first being in one of Robert Demachy's how-to
articles about his newly artistic use of gum bichromate. I forget whether
that particular one was in French or English, but I'll never forget what
caught my attention: When the print had dried, he said, he applied a coat
of "Vernis Soehnee" which ---TA DAH !! -- brought back the deeper tones of
the wet print.

If you look through the list archive you may find many attempts to do just
that in several media -- platinum as well as gum -- and I think I tried
them all and found none useful. For instance,the waxes (Dorland,
Renaissance,) may serve other purposes, but on a gum print they either
create a haze that actually *dulls* the print, or don't do anything else.

Since I have read Mayer (among others) I wouldn't in any event use a
yellowing lacquer or resin, and among other reasons I know Soehnee was a
real company is that Gene Robkin, a college professor with an EXTREMELY
helpful library, researched it & traced a long period of the business --
although the chemistry info didn't turn up.

I thought the major ingredient was probably shellac, because one reference
in Demachy & another in a 20th century artists' materials manual mentioned
solubility in shellac. However, shellac doesn't keep, tho possibly there's
some preservative I haven't seen mentioned. Meanwhile, after the "lac" &
alcohol were mixed, they gave a nasty & harsh, not a luscious wet look to
the print, and the mixture in container proceded to darken.

The "bleached lac" Chris mentions, would I suppose be what Kremer sells as
their "white shellac" -- I think that's what they call it, though can't
lay hands on the catalog this minute. However, I bought it and tried every
pound cut the expert at local woodfinishing shop suggested (and he seemed
to know his stuff, including the whole history of shellac, starting with
the French & some Scandinavian tribe). It DID NOT WORK ! Possibly
because shellac doesn't work over gelatin (I'm told) -- Demachy didn't use
a gelatin size.

I've got several books of other formulas, some of which I've tried, others
I may, just for the heck of it try one day. I think I probably got past
the wish for that effect, finding other kinds of layering, etc., effective
enough. I'll add though, that the one technique of the dozens I tried that
did seem to have a good effect was a wash (by pouring, not brushing) of a
diluted gum arabic over the finished print. Since, however, it remained
very soluble, and hardening it removed the shine, made it quite dull in
fact, it didn't seem a useful treatment.

One varnish I didn't try that seemed worth looking at was sandarac... None
of my sources listed it, but I didn't search for it as strenuously as I
might. (Life is so mean about things like that.) I also tried admixtures
such as Venice Turpentine (oy! what a mess) and so forth. My hunch is
that it wouldn't be as old as, say, before 1860. Demachy's articles were
after 1896.

As noted, I'm probably free of that obsession, at least, pro tem, but it
would surely be a thrill to solve the puzzle. Meanwhile thanks to Mark for
his concern & comments & Chris for her encylopedianism !

Judy
Received on Wed Dec 28 23:22:57 2005