Re: report on glyoxal yellowing

From: Judy Seigel ^lt;>
Date: 11/15/04-01:39:27 PM Z
Message-id: <>

On Sun, 14 Nov 2004, Christina Z. Anderson wrote:
> Nope, proved nothing to no one except that down here with my process and
> Fabriano, the paper yellows. In MT with my process, and Rives BFK paper
> doesn't yellow. Down here with my process and Fabriano, I get degrees of
> yellowing in the different papers. That to me shows it is NOT **just** my
> process, or SC, but another factor of the paper, when yellowing occurs. The
> fact that all test samples showed this in all conditions proves that enough
> to me.

Chris, as I read this you haven't tested BFK in SC? Or Fabriano in MT?
So as far as your findings are concerned, it's possible that Fabriano
might not yellow in MT and Rives BFK might yellow in SC !?

So as far as you've established, as far as i can tell, the factor at work
is either geography or the paper, or the paper in the geography.

That's not counting the additional variable of rinsing/not rinsing.

> I'll be back in MT in less than a year so I will then test Fabriano up there
> with my same procedure (no rinsing and then I'll rinse a batch) to see if
> this yellowing occurs. I am going to bet you five bucks I will get this
> yellowing on Fabriano up there, too. So you may be getting five bucks in the
> mail.

I rarely bet less than a million dollars, but if you define your variables
more here I may take you up on it.

> What it proves to me is that glyoxal is not a suitable hardener, and that is
> enough.

Except for those who find it perfectly suitable -- accessible, convenient,
and (relatively) inexpensive.

> Yesterday I emailed Don B offlist a comparison of gly hardened and glut
> hardened paper printed with the same neg and time of a cyano. It is amazing
> the difference. The cyano is sharp and navy and beautiful on glut, and dull
> and paler on gly. Now, this can be due to allllll kinds of variables, but

Actually, you may have established something a bit different than your
conclusion here. I myself have in repeated tests found that cyano never
prints as well or even very well at all on paper with an added gelatin
size as it does on the paper just as purchased (which is why Sarah Van
Keuren, for instance, does her cyano layer *before* sizing, then gelatin
sizes and continues the other gum coats).

Your finding suggests that gelatin sized paper hardened in glut is just as
good if not better for cyano than unsized paper... That the *hardener* is
what makes the difference. Of course you'd have to test on the raw paper
also to be sure it wasn't some other factor.... but still an interesting
factoid, even possible fact.

But one other point about the glut -- you mention Katharine's experience
as AWFUL WARNING. It does seem that the stuff has to be handled with great
care. But Katharine retracted her alarm report, saying that she'd found
the condition she described had a different cause.


> what is hilarious is the fact that I didn't know this was the reason while I
> was developing. I kept getting these dull prints, and I thought, ohmagosh,
> did I coat thinly, not expose correctly etc....what was wrong? Luckily, I
> had recorded in fine print on the edge of the papers which were gly and which
> were glut sized, and all glys were dull and paler. Hey, I can email the jpeg
> offlist to anyone who is interested, too.
Received on Mon Nov 15 13:39:49 2004

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