Re: Got it !! Re: help identifying a book

From: Judy Seigel ^lt;[email protected]>
Date: 06/08/04-08:37:01 PM Z
Message-id: <>

On Tue, 8 Jun 2004, Christina Z. Anderson wrote:

> Yes I would like the book; I am much interested in multiple editions of the
> same author to see how the process changed thru time.

My sense of the Gassan book is that the changes are as much due to growing
expertise in writing a text as anything else... Nowadays alt-text writers
have dozens of models to copy -- or not copy. Gassan's *second* edition
was 1971. I can't think of any book with these processes (except
Anderson!) before him. And of course a book without an index is
unthinkable today.

> Judy: Paul Anderson in one book talks about having a--what I
> calculated--quart and a half of gum solution preserved perfectly for 16
> years in one book, and then in another book 4 years later he talks about
> having a gum solution 18 years. I wonder, does the guy ever gum print?? Or

As I've said on this list, also in P-F #9 (p. 48): Anderson's archive at
the Center for Creative photography has 481 prints, of which only 14 are
gums. Others of his cohort were far more accomplished and sophisticated
gum printers, but they didn't have the *system* that impressed Henney &
Dudley (who said they aimed for the authority of "an engineering
handbook." Anderson was a former engineer.)

> did he just mix up oodles at once and had a leftover supply? I went thru a
> liter of gum this semester alone! And then he originally says that all

His prints were smaller than yours, as I recall mostly 8x10 inches, and 14
prints at 8x10 when you're using 3 parts am di solution to one part gum
don't take a lot of gum.

> prints can be had in 4-6 coats, and then modifies that to 5-8...this kind of

That's all blowing air anyway .. as I recall his 1935 book says 3 coats --
but others said two, Puyo and Demachy said one.

> stuff interests me, why changes might have occurred. Also in when gum went
> from "bi" to "di" and other such things.

I believe the chemists said "di", the terminology changed (when? July 18,
1931??) but gum printers seemed not to care... Most of the gum tracts did
and I believe still do say "bi."

> One more thing about research--there are two books at the Harry Ransom
> center I want: Hofmeister wrote a book on gum and so did Puyo. Harry
> Ransom Center in Austin will NOT send the books to Clemson for my use
> (understandable), nor xerox the books in entirety due to copyright
> restrictions. These books are 100 years old--copyright??!!! One is in
> French, which I can read; the other is German, which I can't. I can't send
> my German translator to Austin for a vacation! I am quite bummed....I wish
> there were someone I knew there who was German....
> Chris

Ah Chris -- you are so spoiled. Do you have any idea how fabulous your
library resources have been !!!??? (as I understand it, both Clemson AND
Minnesota.) Who, by the way, is this Hofmeister?? Have you seen the book
Puyo wrote with Demachy? (It may be similar to his solo book.)

Received on Tue Jun 8 20:37:09 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 07/02/04-09:40:13 AM Z CST