Re: Could someone summarize that gum up or down discussion?

Joe,

the answer to your question is very short indeed, a simple NO WAY summarize
it quite nicely. If anyone comes up with something different answer, I'll be
the first to prove it wrong behond any reasonable doubt(s).

Regards
Yves

----- Original Message -----
From: "Joe Smigiel" <jsmigiel@kvcc.edu>
To: <alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca>
Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2006 8:52 PM
Subject: Could someone summarize that gum up or down discussion?

> Could someone please *succinctly* summarize the gum hardening from the
> top down issue for me?
>
> I skimmed many of the posts but I missed seeing anything that would
> point to hardening from the bottom up. I have to admit my attention
> span isn't what it used to be and that I lost interest in reading the
> off-topic banter but I would be interested in any novel empirical
> results that would lead one to believe gum hardens from the bottom up.
>
> Marek's image on transparency helps convince that gum hardens from top
> down, but isn't that image problematic by also negating the widely held
> belief that more surface roughness (e.g., Pictorico ceramic layer vs
> smooth side) allows for a stronger or easier to print image in a single
> layer? (A post for perhaps another day...)
>
> My take on this is has always been that gum hardens from the top down
> and that is evidenced by the often observed flaking of a too
> strongly-pigmented and underexposed emulsion layer. It comes off in
> chunks once the unexposed emulsion beneath it dissolves in water. This
> also seems confirmed by Marek's latest image. What leads others to
> believe or postulate the opposite?
>
> Let's leave who cares, what's the point, and who's a bad person out of
> this please and thank you.
>
> joe
>
>
>
>
Received on Thu Apr 13 19:01:47 2006