RE: Gum over Palladium

Thanks for the reply, Katherine,

Regarding the pigments I use (no idea if they are transparent) are from W&N, Cotman (do not have the tubes in front of me right now): Burnt Sienna, Alizarin Crimson, Cobalt Blue (I believe), and Cadmium Yellow (I think)..

Thanks in adavance,

Best,

Cor

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Katharine Thayer [mailto:kthayer@pacifier.com]
> Sent: woensdag 26 oktober 2005 11:47
> To: alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca
> Subject: Re: Gum over Palladium
>
>
> Hello Cor,
> If you use a transparent pigment, then follow Loris'
> instructions -- a
> light pigment mix, more exposure, enough dichromate to keep
> the contrast
> reasonable (not too high)-- you should be able to get the result you
> want without having to create special masks or tediously brushing gum
> off shadow areas during development. A transparent pigment shouldn't
> show over the dark areas. There's an example of what I'm talking about
> (in tricolor gum rather than gum over palladium, but I assume it
> operates similarly) here:
>
> http://www.pacifier.com/~kthayer/
>
> I printed a layer of strong transparent yellow over the entire print,
> after printing the initial three color layers, to correct the color
> balance; you can see that the yellow simply doesn't show over
> the darks,
> since it is a transparent pigment. The advantage of doing it
> this way is
> that when you're done you'll have a uniform surface look over
> the entire
> print, depending on whether that's what you want, of course. And it's
> easier than the other suggestions. If I knew what color you're aiming
> for, I may be able to suggest a transparent pigment, if you don't
> already have one in mind.
> Katharine
>
> Loris Medici wrote:
> >
> > I see..
> >
> > Anyway, my way of thinking was as following: Less pigment
> will veil the
> > shadows less but in the same time its effect in highlights
> will be more
> > subtle. More dichromate/exposure is for decreasing the
> contrast of the
> > resulting gum layer: if contrast is high then you will get
> tone in the
> > shadows but not in the highlights (you want the opposite).
> Plus, if you
> > don't like the effect of gum exposure in the shadows you
> will need some
> > delicate brush work - probably hard to do with 4x5 prints.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Loris.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Breukel, C. (HKG) [mailto:C.Breukel@lumc.nl]
> > Sent: 26 Ekim 2005 Çarþamba 10:53
> > To: alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca
> > Subject: RE: Gum over Palladium
> >
> > Hi Loris,
> >
> > Indeed the digital route is a possibility, am just not
> prepared (yet?)
> > to go down that road, I prefer the traditional way...
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > Cor
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Loris Medici [mailto:loris_medici@mynet.com]
> > > Sent: woensdag 26 oktober 2005 9:51
> > > To: alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca
> > > Subject: RE: Gum over Palladium
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > This is more a question than it is a suggestion: I would
> try... less
> > > pigment and/or more dichromate and/or more exposure
> and/or very soft
> > > brush(es) to remove the hardened emulsion from the shadows (maybe
> > > dropping water gently with a baster?)... What our experienced gum
> > > printers think?
> > >
> > > My "real suggestion" would be printing with digital
> negatives (one for
> >
> > > the Ziatype, one - modified just for printing highlights
> - for the gum
> >
> > > layer)...
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Loris.
>
>
Received on Thu Oct 27 02:19:12 2005