Re: Platinum over Gum

From: Sandy King ^lt;sanking@clemson.edu>
Date: 09/03/04-09:33:56 PM Z
Message-id: <a0602045abd5ee5b70636@[192.168.2.4]>

Yes, gum over platinum dates from the beginning
of the last century and I have seen quite a
number of vintage prints from that period. And
all of the ones I have seen were rather dull and
flat. By contrast the work of some of the
contemporary photographers doing gum over
platinum has a glow and luminosity not present in
the vintage prints, at least not in the ones that
I have seen. By contemporary workers I mean the
Melvin/Kouklis/Harmon gang.

For a good idea of how this bandits are working
the process see Clay's article at
http://unblinkingeye.com/Articles/GoverP/goverp.html.

Plus a change, plus a hange, as some pervert the saying.

Sandy King

>It was being done approximately 100 years ago. There's plenty of work out
>there.
>
>I've never done it so I have no helpful advice. Isn't the usual procedure
>gum over platinum?
>
>Dave in Wyoming
>
>
>> Is anyone on the list currently printing, or has anyone ever printed
>> platinum/palladium over gum? I'm fairly experienced with Pt/Pd, and I'd
>> like to start working in gum to shake things up a little bit. The few
>> platinum over gum prints I've seen seemed to bring out the best of both
>> processes, so that seemed like the next logical step (after I experiment
>> with gum printing on its own, first).
>>
>>
>>
>> BTW, I apologize for this off-topic posting to the new "Attachments vs. No
>> Attachments" Mailinglist. =8^P
>>
>>
>>
>> -Schuyler Grace
>>
>>
Received on Sun Sep 5 08:32:31 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 10/01/04-09:17:54 AM Z CST