Re: Why multiple exposure (was Re: (Gum) Tonal scale)

From: Katharine Thayer ^lt;>
Date: 12/02/05-09:50:42 AM Z
Message-id: <>

On Dec 2, 2005, at 6:32 AM, Loris Medici wrote:

> Hi Judy,
>> I've never used cerulean blue for gum printing, let alone for
> tricolor. In
> I don't have any particular reasons in selecting that pigment. I was
> looking for a color very close to process cyan which is preferably
> single pigment, transparent, which doesn't stain heavily. My actual
> choice from the catalog was another color (the single pigment PB 15:3)
> but unfortunately that color wasn't in stock, so I purchased the
> closest
> color to my original choice.

Umm, I'm afraid my flippant comment wasn't understood even when it was
put in its proper context. Perhaps too cryptic, sorry. Here's another

Look. The fact that Schminke *calls* this pigment "cerulean blue tone"
doesn't make it cerulean. Cerulean is PB 35. The pigment you are using,
PB 15:3, is pthalo blue. That's what I meant when I said, a convoluted
way to print thalo. And you are right, I should have said a convoluted
way to *market* thalo, not a convoluted way to print thalo; I don't
blame you for being confused. It's a heck of a way to market a thalo
paint, and obviously confuses people into thinking they are using
cerulean when they aren't; it annoys me when manufacturers do that,
hence the comment.
Received on Fri Dec 2 09:51:59 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 01/05/06-01:45:09 PM Z CST