Re: Carbon vs Gum. Was: Re: gum bichromate

Judy Seigel (jseigel@panix.com)
Tue, 13 Jun 1995 13:20:50 -0400 (EDT)

Finding myself not yet "NO CARRIER-ed," I comment on Luis's provocative
ode to carbon:

On Mon, 12 Jun 1995, Luis Nadeau wrote:

> I'll keep the metaphor going;-) The difference between carbon and gum is
> like the difference between a couple of friends and a couple of lovers:

Hmmmm. Which are we supposed to choose? Which is more enduring?

> Carbon transfer can provide very rich blacks, perfectly clean highlights,
> and rasor sharp images (on smooth coated papers), *with one coat* only, if

That does seduce. What about the negatives? Can it take a wide range of
contrasts, or does it need a particular type?

> This is why I find carbon transfer superior to anything else, generally

Single as well as double transfer?

> So, you'll ask: How come we see so few carbon prints out there? How come we
> see so many platinum and gum prints out there?>
> Which brings us to the BAD NEWS:>
> Carbon is 10 times more difficult than Pt or gum.

Luis, I would not classify platinum and gum in the same difficulty range.
Platinum is the EASIEST non-silver process. Forgive me for repeating
myself, but the only *difficulty* is paying for the metal. You may say
making a FINE platinum is tricky, but that's true for any medium -- except
polaroid transfer (where the worse it is the "better" it is).

> There has got to be some place in NYC where you can see excellent carbons
> up close. With the next version of my carbon book I may be offering an
> optional small print as I did with the Pt book, but this is not for
> tomorrow and it would only be one small print. You have to see several,
> from different sources and periods.

But here's something that has troubled me -- with all media. The glass
changes the print so much. Sometimes of course for the better, but more
often with delicacy lost. So I might see naked prints without glass by
special arrangement, but in effect they exist to a viewing public, at home
or in the museum, behind glass. (And prints not behind glass in upscale
galleries don't look right, because we know that's really fake.)

Anyway, after all that hairpulling and ultimate triumph, does the difference
survive covering with glass?
(I daresay the answer will be a heartfelt yes, and I'll even
believe it, but the issue of glass is a troubling one to me across the board
and does come to mind here.)

> > Possibly next summer, I may start my long rumored Summer School and
> Research Center, which will offer workshops on carbon printing (and perhaps
> other processes), and which will make a good part of my collection (300+

Well, no doubt in Canada you can do carbon printing all year-round, even
in August. So let us know!

Judy