Re: Platinum over Gum

From: Sandy King ^lt;sanking@clemson.edu>
Date: 09/03/04-09:53:33 PM Z
Message-id: <a0602045cbd5eec96a277@[192.168.2.4]>

Ahhh, I forgot to mention Stan Klimek.

Sandy

>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 ša change, plus ša šhange, 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 08:34:27 2004

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