Re: Gum Tri-Color Yellow

From: Katharine Thayer ^lt;[email protected]>
Date: 07/04/04-03:56:56 AM Z
Message-id: <>

Christina Z. Anderson wrote:
> Hi all,
> I'm out of town and not real connected to a computer here, so probably
> missed some of the tricolor posts. Plus I have to use this crummy small
> laptop keyboard. But, for whatever it is worth:
> I've used all kinds of magentas/reds and they seem to
> work....quinacridone magenta, anthraquinoid red, bright red, etc. With
> tricolor seps which are RGB (not CMYK) the only time I've had problems with
> the red layer was when i used bright red (W and N) and it was just
> that--BRIGHT. Pretty garish. But then when I want to get a Clemson Tiger
> orange in my tricolor, it works great. You can see the reds on two of my
> images on Drayton Hall brick wall doorway image, and
> the Home Cookin image, the red is visible in the taillights of the car.
> Since I am away from my tubes of paint at the moment I can't tell you the
> exact colors, except I know it has been Q Magenta by Daniel Smith and any of
> the reds by M. Graham and W+N--never the fugitive ones like Alizarin. I
> particularly like the anthraquinoid. I don't use cad red much. In other
> words, I vary the use of my reds and have not found it a concern.

Hi Chris,
I think you may have missed the point: throughout this discussion it has
never been debated that any of the reds under discussion print well by
themselves (as in your red taillights) or in combination with one other
color (as in your orange brick doorway). The issue is a brownish hue
that can appear when all three colors are printed over each other, and,
at least as they appear in jpegs on my system, many of your images
evince this brownish hue where the colors are combined. I'm not saying
this is wrong, or a mistake, or anything, in fact I think the brownish
cast is very effective in your images. But the whole point of this
discussion has been: for people who don't want that brownish cast, what
to do? My answer is to choose reds that have a violet component but not
much of a blue component.

> However, this is with tricolor seps; printing the same BW neg with
> tricolor would probably entail more adjustment.

> I have not found it an exact science; more importantly I find that the
> amount of each pigment is my variable to mess with; the color choice is not
> as critical.
> Then again, I am not trying to imitate a type C-print, preferring the
> imperfections of the gum process and the variability that I get; that is the
> charm of the process. In other words, if they are too perfect,
> non-photographers see them and do not know they are gums; photographers see
> them and wonder why not just print a C-print? Which to me is a valid
> question.
> Some of the prints that I did that were very muted and soft were the
> ones the faculty liked, ex: the Vanity, Vanity image on
> I had begun my prints in that style, and one faculty member told me to up my
> color/contrast, so I added double the color of each pigment and printed that
> way from then on. Then I find that the muted way was seductive to others.
> Just like sometimes I get a bit of flaking in a part of the print and I
> think it is a failed print, and then a faculty member will say they like
> that gritty look (e.g. the garbage bag with the yellow tie on
>; it is gritty on the right side). Bottom line: there are
> many ways to get beautiful gums that may not entail perfect color balance,
> saturation. But you all already know that, I'm sure you'll tell me...
> Chris
Received on Sun Jul 4 10:53:22 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 08/13/04-09:01:10 AM Z CST