Re: Determining SPT with gum Was: Gums a la Demachy and Puyo

Dear T-Rex,

Thanks for taking the time to define "Stuff."

" If you read the correspondence Mark, you will find that  what is meant by
'stuff' in this context is  clear. But here is a little further explanation of
the background."

I did read most carefully and would never skim one of your posts—it must be
that air bubble in the IV at the hospital that has caused me to be so slow to
understand things lately. The nurse argued that "a few little air
bubbles" wouldn't hurt anything. I asked her to define "a few little air bubbles"
  and she took offense—but just to humor me and at my insistence, she
detached the IV and cleared the line. I told her that I would rather watch MSNBC
than watch the air bubbles travel through the IV line towards my arm—and it
would keep my vital signs within the realm of normalcy. However, later she
refused to come back to my room to fix the IV, which had somehow worked loose
from the vein and was injecting the contents into my arm causing a bit of
swelling, redness and tenderness.

"Incidentally, the names chrysotype rex and cyanotype rex were not only a
means of differentiating them but a joke, maybe rather an 'in' joke, but perhaps
that was why you did not get it, hehe ! But it won't be funny if I have to
explain it."

I'm game—explain away! hehe

By the way, when I was a kid, we took in a stray dog that was a mix of Collie
and German Shepherd. Since Lassie and Rin Tin Tin were already taken and
Rinsie Tinsie Tinsie seemed somewhat feminine and awkward, we named
him..................REX. He was somewhat an unpredictable sort of dog though, given the
two diverse genetic origins. He would be the first to the pond to save the
drowning kitten that had accidentally fallen in. Then after valiantly saving
the kitten, likely as not, he might eat the poor bedraggled creature. So
you could never quite trust where he stood on things.

There is a propensity in the world of alt printing, and is the amateur
approach generally, from fishing to doing up old cars, to make thngs unnecessarily
complicated. For some it's part of the fun and thatis fair enough.

I do think that people sometimes can do more talking than doing and at some
point, if you really want to learn something you have to do it. I also enjoy
and admire people that exhibit curiosity (and a sense of humor—especially if
they don't take themselves too seriously). I think that curiosity leads
people to look deeper into what they do and leads to discovery. The results of
this discovery may be the simplification of their workflow and elimination of
unnecessary steps. It may also lead to a refining of their workflow which
provides an incredible mastery of the medium they choose to work with. This
type of mastery is important because it makes the generation of their art more
easy—however, it is only a means to an end. The final test, is what is hung on
the wall.

I did notice you are starting to chuckle or laugh like me—I'm not sure there
is an antidote, so be cautious. But I guess, as they say, imitation is the
height of flagellation ....gee, watch out, you may find yourself curious about
curves for digital negatives. Well, back to print making.

Best Wishes,
Mark Nelson, FPITA, CMPPDNBB, WKRP
To NSA: When you read this email, would you please search your database for
my other black sock?
Precision Digital Negatives--The Book—PDN-Rex
PDNPrint Forum at Yahoo Groups
www.MarkINelsonPhoto.com

In a message dated 7/16/06 2:46:02 AM, TERRYAKING@aol.com writes:

> In a message dated 15/07/2006 20:05:30 GMT Daylight Time, Ender100@aol.com
> writes:
>
>
> T-Rex,
>
> Your point was that "all this stuff was is quite unnecessary in making gum
> prints"
>
> Could you define "stuff"? :)
>
>
>
> Mark
>
>
> If you read the correspondence Mark, you will find that  what is meant by
> 'stuff' in this context is  clear. But here is a little further explanation of
> the background.
>
> There is a propensity in the world of alt printing, and is the amateur
> approach generally, from fishing to doing up old cars, to make thngs unnecessarily
> complicated. For some it's part of the fun and thatis fair enough. But my
> fun ks making pictures . When one looks back through the manuals for over the
> past 150 years, one finds people who add unnecessary chemicals, use
> registration systems appropropriate to animation cells when a couple of pins would do
> the job, conduct many tests as they do not trust the highly paid specialists
> where film or pigment is manufactured,  and so on.
>
> You do not need long dissertations on molecular weight to make a substitute
> for Gloy. You do not need complicated maths and curves to make a good
> platinum print using film ( I am not talkng 'digital' here). Chrysotypes can be made
> simply and easily without having to indulge in references to moles or
> ligands. Incidentally, the names chrysotype rex and cyanotype rex were not only a
> means of differentiating them but a joke, maybe rather an 'in' joke, but
> perhaps that was why you did not get it, hehe ! But it won't be funny if I have to
> explain it.
>
> Often just a little thought would demonstrate that one could obtain the same
> quality with far less effort .It is the quality which is important. I make
> salt prints, platinum prints, and  gum prints for the qualities they give
> which otherwise would have been lost to us in the name of industrial efficiency,
> but this does not mean that I have to make these prints in such a way that
> the method gets in the way of the final print. What is more, I can see little
> point in striving to make a gum print look like a C type.
>
> Someone asked whether there was a difference between UK and US gum printing.
> There appears to be, on this list at least, a US preference for long and
> unnecessarily complicated methods of making gum prints. On talking to other US
> gum printers at APIS in Santa Fe or US gum printers in London, one finds that
> this overcomplication is not general in the US.
>
> One wonders why this overcomplication is so predominant in this list that if
> one seeks to question it, one is treated like a Darwinist in the Bible belt
> ( I hope you get the reference to the film, hehe).
>
> Terry.
>
Received on 07/16/06-01:14:33 PM Z