Re: paper shrinkage

From: Judy Seigel ^lt;[email protected]>
Date: 05/08/04-12:45:54 PM Z
Message-id: <>

On Sat, 8 May 2004, Christina Z. Anderson wrote:
> (I also remember someone--I think Judy--posting that you could "fudge"
> it with a pencil, coloring in to mask the misregistration, and also that
> more repeated layers would serve to hide the misregistration. So it's not a
> lost cause when it happens, just requires more work.)

Yikes -- next thing you'll be saying I invented the Great GPR test !! I
was quoting Paul Anderson from his Pictorial Photography book, the chapter
was probably the one on gum over platinum, and that was his suggestion for
coping with the fact that nobody probably ever pre-shrunk a platinum
print. But a platinum print would probably not have been larger than 8x10
in 1935 (would it), so in any event the mis-register wouldn't have been so
great. As I recall, he said in case of a portrait, register the face and
fudge the shoulders.

But speaking of re-registering gums, I forgot to mention another thing,
which was also MUCH more noticeable in a large print than small: You
think the print is dry the next day for the next coat -- but it will
almost always shrink a bit more by the day after that. Which is to say,
assuming the humidity in your life is relatively constant, it helps to do
subsequent coats at the same intervals. As for drying the paper with hair
dryer -- that tends to dry the surface, leaving the interior damp,
ESPECIALLY in a thick paper. Not only is that iffy for re-register, but
risks squeezing up the interior moisture if you put it in a full pressure
vacuum frame, which could damage the negative and/or lead to mottling in
the print.

At this point, incidentally, my guess about causes would be at least as
much if not most of shrinkage is a factor of other factors than the size
-- how fine and what type the pulp, how coarse the mesh or pad, how hard
rolled, which direction rolled, stirred or shaken, etc. etc. (and maybe
also *amount* of size ... (?))


> However, when I was working with Artistico I did not see it shrink that
> much in the first shrink, and thinking about aquapel (or whatever may be in
> the new Artistico), maybe some *sizings* are more dimensionally stable as
> Jack suggested...I have not had the registration nightmare so far with that
> paper, and hopefully it will stay that way through multiple layers (I'm
> crossing my fingers). Those of you paper makers like Tom Ferguson, maybe
> you have opinions on this? Or is it something else, like the type of fibers,
> or the tightness of the fiber?
> Chris
Received on Sun May 9 11:14:18 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 06/04/04-01:20:52 PM Z CST