Re: tonal inversion and pigment loads

All,
The more I think about this diatribe, the more bewildering it seems
to me. There were three or four of us showing observations,
making comments and asking questions about the observations,
answering the comments and questions, taking the responses into
account in further questions and comments. In other words I thought
a good and evolving discussion was occurring, perhaps not productive
in the sense of providing final answers (when has this list ever
produced such on any question?) but certainly fruitful in the sense
of raising and exploring some of the complexities of a complicated
question, I didn't think the dialogue had run its course; for
example the exchange between Jack and me this morning was not going
in circles repeating what we've said before, but responding
thoughtfully to each other's comments, trying to figure something
out; that's how it was for me anyway. There have been discussions on
this list that have deteriorated into endless repeats of the same
arguments, but I hardly think this has been one of them.

Katharine

On Jan 30, 2006, at 8:39 AM, altprinter wrote:

> 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 13:44:21 2006