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

Date: 06/09/04-04:21:39 PM Z
Message-id: <000001c44e70$66b83b30$aeeb883e@TELA01.EU>

Judy i think Chris is refering to the Brothers HofmeisterTheodor and Oscar
who produced some exquisite Gum prints in the early 1900s . I recently
obtained a book in German from an exhibition called "Russian and German art
photography in 1900" The photographs of Sergei Lobovikov and The brothers
Hofmeister the book is called Meisterwerk 1999 ISBN 3-7913-2234-6 this book
contains some wonderful Gum and Bromoil images and i obtained it from Mike
Wells a photobook dealer in London.Hope this helps Dennis Klinker
----- Original Message -----
From: "Judy Seigel" <>
To: <>
Cc: <>
Sent: Wednesday, June 09, 2004 3:37 AM
Subject: Re: Got it !! Re: help identifying a book

> On Tue, 8 Jun 2004, Christina Z. Anderson wrote:
> > Yes I would like the book; I am much interested in multiple editions of
> > 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??
> 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
> > 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
> > my German translator to Austin for a vacation! I am quite bummed....I
> > 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.)
> Judy
Received on Wed Jun 9 16:31:49 2004

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