From: Christina Z. Anderson (zphoto@montana.net)
Date: 03/04/03-10:01:41 AM Z
Ed,
I'm not exactly answering your question but here are some thoughts:
I tried this on Rives BFK, Arches Cover, St. Armands, and now I forget
which others, but the unsized Rives worked the best. The others stained.
It must have enough size in the paper, like Judy said Buxton did (which gave
me the original idea to try it one coat, no size). Now, mind you, it is a
gritty look--like a charcoal drawing! I could scan it to you and send you a
jpeg. But it definitely cleared to white when I pot metabisulfited it (is
that a verb) with Livick's proportion of 1%, or 2 tsp of pot met in 1 liter
water.
It taught me that I can certainly "up" my pigment amount, but it would,
at that concentration, be best with a one layer gum. However, I did the
same experiment with 6g to 12ml Daniel Smith Pinkcolor, a REALLY weakly
pigmented color that has never worked for me to be worth it, and I gave it a
12 minute exposure under UV, and it looks sickly green when it comes out, of
course, because the dichromate color overpowers it, but when I cleared it,
it was a beautiful pale baby pink, finely detailed, that would make a great
first coat of gum to "size" the paper with like you are saying, below. I
had a white collar on a shirt and some dark blacks in the image and it did a
beautiful paler than pale, fully tonally detailed white collar. So, I guess
what I am saying, is why bother with straight gum arabic when you can get a
tad of a base color in there to print your highlights before you then put
another coat on top?
On this list I have notes that the one layer unpigmented gum thing is
yukky so I never tried it.
Chris (who is rushing off to teach and has no BUSINESS sitting at this
computer instead of grading papers...but oh how fun)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ed Buffaloe" <EdBuffaloe@UnblinkingEye.Com>
To: <alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca>
Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2003 4:56 AM
Subject: Re: fogging; japanese photography; gum
> I decided to try this, but thought I would take a suggestion from Terry
King
> and put down an unpigmented coat of gum first, to prevent pigment staining
> later. After soaking for 24 hours I had a grey stain that I assume is
> chromium. I added some sulphuric acid and soaked overnight and the stain
is
> slowly going away--I expect it will be gone when I return home this
evening.
> My question is, will I have this same stain problem with every layer I
> print? I'm using Fabriano Uno, pre-shrunk and gelatin sized.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Christina Z. Anderson" <zphoto@montana.net>
> Anyway, unsized
> > Rives BFK, 6g of lamp black pigment mixed into 12 ml of gum arabic from
> > Daniel Smith, mixed equally with am di at 24% (12g per 50ml) that has
been
> > sitting around in my cupboard for 4 years and still works just FINE (and
> so
> > does the 4 year old gum AND the four year old mixed pigments) made a
> > wonderfully rich one coat, deep, black, moody print. I was taking
> Livick's
> > word on his astronomical (to me) amount of pigment he uses in his gum
> > solution. We were taught to mix 3g pigment into 50 ml gum!! Livick's
is
> > 8.33 times that amount! And I chose lamp black because of its staining
> > capability/high coverage capability so that if Livick was overmixing his
> > gum/pigment ratio, it should appear---not that this is the quinacridones
> or
> > thalos, tho. I coated half the print in the old ratio, half in
Livick's,
> > on alum and unsized paper both, exposed at 12 minutes and 24 minutes
under
> > the UV lightbox (Edwards) and then did my full print on unsized Rives
BFK
> > paper at about 8 minutes. The old color formula was quite anemic, and
not
> > worth it, so even if I was multiple coating I would mix way more pigment
> > into the gum than 3g, for lamp black anyway.
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : 04/22/03-02:37:24 PM Z CST