Neg for carbon, and Denglass

Sam Wang (stmwang@hubcap.clemson.edu)
Wed, 14 Jun 1995 21:09:31 -0400 (EDT)

From: Judy Seigel <jseigel@panix.com>
>
> That does seduce. What about the negatives? Can it take a wide range of
> contrasts, or does it need a particular type?

I've printed succesfully from negatives ranging from .9 to 2.1. That is
one particularly interesting aspect of carbon.

I still won't touch your question about which is more enduring, carbon or
gum, or is it friends or lovers, with a ten foot pole...

On Luis' comments about Denglass. Yes, they are still making it. I don't
have the manyfacturers' name, but I obtained a bunch (a *small* bunch
actually, at those prices!) from a framery/gallery by asking for "museum
glass". It is fantastic stuff. Side by side comparison shows dramatically
how much regular glass kills the surface qualities of fine images. It's
supposed to block out 90% of UV light as well. On the negative side, it
does have a slight blue cast, gets discolored by finger prints easily
(just like your multicoated camera lens), and quite expensive - the
discounted price I paid was about $130 for a sheet of 32x40". But like
they say on TV, it's worth it. That comes to about $30 for each of the
16x20. If there's interest, and if there's difficulty in locating this
stuff, I can call my framery and get the details. Or is it all in the FAQ?

Sam

-- 
Sam Wang  stmwang@hubcap.clemson.edu    803/656-3924voice 656-0204fax
Art Dept., Clemson University, Clemson, SC 29634-0509