Katharine,
>I like your idea that it's probably some sort of static charge that's
>holding the loose pigment to the substrate in areas where there's no
>hardened gum, and where the pigment hasn't penetrated fibers to
>create an indelible stain, and I think your insight about that is a
>great contribution.
Has anyone tried to measure the static charge involved? Without doing any measurments, just attributing this affect to static charges is just specious.
Of course I suppose most of what has been exprressed thus far about tonal inversion is simply conjecture based on emperical observations.
Frankly, I don't see that tonal inversion matters to the average gum printer since inversion seems to be an anomaly of the process rather than the norm.
In short why all the fuss over this? You guys are becoming obessive and keep repeating the same things over and over.
My 2 cents,
Don Bryant
Received on Mon Jan 30 10:39:35 2006
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 02/14/06-10:55:39 AM Z CST