Re: Kate's new gums :)

From: Hamish Stewart ^lt;[email protected]>
Date: 07/27/05-06:23:27 PM Z
Message-id: <>


I also once believed that gum could not resolve fine detail :-). Your
comment on the pictorialists was brought home to me today visiting a show at
the Royal Academy here in London of Monet and American Impressionists, which
broadly links to the height of historical gum printing in the 1890s and into
the early years of the 20th century. Looking at the brush strokes and
surface of some of these paintings reminds me of some of Steichen's work and
some of Demachy.

However more interesting in a way was a large Monet show in Paris a few
years back which including photos of the gardens at Giverny - which were
reminiscent of the water lily paintings - but which came first...?

Being able to chose how to interpret a print-making style is one of the joys
of gum I think..

Hamish Stewart Gum Bichromate Photographer -

> From: Kate M <>
> Reply-To:
> Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2005 08:25:28 +1200
> To:
> Subject: RE: Kate's new gums :)
> "the final effect incorporates both gum's ability to show sharp detail "
> Funny, when I first started making gumprints I read that gum wasn't
> able to show fine deatil....<belly laugh> those darn pictorialists!!
> The context was of pinhole photography as I recall, and I was advised
> nopt to make pinhole photos with gum as they would be "very fuzzy" due
> to the combined effects of pinhole and gum.
> Amazing, the human ability to see one aspect of something and ignore the
> rest to the point where they actually advise others without any personal
> knowledge!
> Musing on humanity today...
> Kate
> --
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> Version: 7.0.338 / Virus Database: 267.9.5/58 - Release Date: 25/07/2005
Received on Wed Jul 27 18:23:36 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 08/25/05-05:31:52 PM Z CST