Réf. : Re: tooth and no tooth

From: philippe berger ^lt;mineurdecharbon@skynet.be>
Date: 11/13/04-12:42:41 PM Z
Message-id: <419655A1.000001.02916@i7l8m9>

Reply-To: "philippe berger" <mineurdecharbon@skynet.be>
X-PerlMx-Spam: GaugeIIIIIIII, Probability8%, Report'REFERENCES 0'

Photography on alluminium is easy
My carbon on alluminium
Best regards
-------Message original-------
De : alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca
Date : Saturday, November 13, 2004 19:30:54
A : alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca
Sujet : Re: tooth and no tooth
Sorry to disagree with you.
Prints on alluminum are great.
Just read Photo-Imaging by Jill Enfield and whatever she does it applies to
gum as well.
----- Original Message -----
To: <alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca>
Sent: Saturday, November 13, 2004 1:54 AM
Subject: tooth and no tooth
> > gdimase@hotmail.com wrote:
> >> Glass and alluminum are perfectly clean without any "tooth" and you can
> >> print perfectly on them, right?
> I haven't heard of anyone who can print gum on a hard surface without a
> substrate or some kind of roughing up. If I remember correctly, Galina
> uses gelatin.
> And I daresay Christopher James is right about ways to get "tooth" on
> those impervious materials... HOWEVER, I think the business about "tooth"
> being needed on paper, needs some qualification: It's quite possible to
> make a reasonable gum print on a smooth paper (I've used for instance a
> Strathmore plate finish drawing paper). Odds are the highlights will wash
> off, so unless you take steps it won't be full tonal scale -- but probably
> about 75% of the image will arrive.
> And, (drum roll please) the story about gum hanging onto the tooth in
> *paper* is another one of those Anderson fairy tales... exactly like the
> great GPR test (oops I said it again). Anderson decided it was *logical*
> and never checked it against a control, drew this scientific-looking
> diagram, which in due course was copied from Dudley & Henney into Keepers
> of Light & I don't remember where else, but I've seen it here or there.
> I don't think this is one of the great mysteries of photography either: On
> paper, even with no tooth, the gum solution soaks into the paper fibers,
> and so, instead of sliding off (as it would from a hard, entirely
> non-absorbent surface) it makes a print. In fact I think a pretty fair
> print with some rudimentary highlights can be gotten -- it's years since I
> tested it and there seemed little reason to continue -- but, facts is
> facts.
> Judy
Received on Sat Nov 13 12:43:17 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 12/08/04-10:51:33 AM Z CST