Re: results from gum printing with the PDN system

From: Christina Z. Anderson ^lt;[email protected]>
Date: 06/14/05-07:45:30 AM Z
Message-id: <006b01c570e7$5772ba20$6101a8c0@your6bvpxyztoq>

> (Marek wrote) Hi Chris,
> Lokks like you are happy with your approach here and exited about the
> results. I will not be able to make it to APIS to see the prints. Would
> it be possible to look at your results on line( or off line email with
> scans). What pigments did you use for your tests? IMO color fidelity is
> the function of pigments used, not so much as tuning each individual
> separation. I am really curious about your results.

Hi Marek and Katharine,

I would agree with both of you to an extent, and have always thought that
the color fidelity was not only a function of pigment used, but also how
much pigment in each layer--in other words, too much magenta, it'd be too
biased to magenta. Along with exposure and development, of course.

First, forgive me if I don't answer much over the next several weeks for 2
reasons: I am in the process of packing and moving, and I leave

I did actually make time to size paper (husband is thinking of killing me),
which I am doing today amidst the boxes, because there is no way I can make
generalizations about all this until I get repeatable results. As soon as I
get a series of prints done with PDN negs I will then send them offlist or
find a post place online (maybe as Ed has graciously
allowed me to do in the past).

This so far is true: I am completely surprised by the positive results I
got on my first run thru the PDN system with gum. I was not expecting it to
apply to gum as it does to other processes.

Two, I am shocked at how the image I got looks like my computer screen
image. The color fidelity is to the computer screen, if that makes sense.
I was not expecting this result.

I've been pondering this laying awake at night and wonder if this
explanation might fit: if you curve the pigment exactly the dilution and
exposure at which you are going to use it, then the curve will place the
color tonally as far as the alt process allows it to go. The separation
negative then chooses where each color is going to be placed in the image,
providing the color can actually go there and stay there (be hardened).
Since the separation negative is curved to match the color, dilution,
exposure, and process you've chosen, presumably the color will go and harden
where the negative needs it to.

Again, I am not saying that other methods don't work. My whole thesis show
was by my former method. I'll tell you one thing that doesn't make me
happy: aside from the expense of Pictorico, the material is so sturdy that
it does not meld into the paper like the Photo Warehouse does, so if there
are any dips in your paper you'll get blurry exposure from incomplete
contact. That sure teeed me off. And I am not buying a vacuum frame.

I'm reprinting some negs now to get more repeatable examples. After that, I
will have to do things such as switch pigment choices and dilutions,
exposure time and development time, sit time between coat and exposure,
etc., and then even go back and derive better curves with my old system to
see if it is just a curve issue. I know the yellow curve is different than
magenta and cyanotype, so one size fits all curve for gum is not the case.
If that is the only thing PDN has taught me about gum, it was worth the $75
bucks it costs (aside from the fact that I didn't have to write a computer
program to plot the curves).

This will take me more than a couple weeks, of course--probably the summer.
So don't hold your breath.

My colors I used were Maimeri arylide yellow PY97 and Maimeri Rose Lake
Received on Tue Jun 14 07:45:51 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 07/07/05-11:30:54 AM Z CST