Re: Further Gum Woes was Gum woes revisited

From: Dave Rose ^lt;[email protected]>
Date: 05/24/05-07:17:01 AM Z
Message-id: <000901c56062$df0363d0$26cc9045@dave6m4323wvj7>

The opinion that "good" gumprints should not have a "shine" is only an
opinion. Many of my prints will have a gloss or shine in the darker shadow
areas. I don't find it distracting or bad.

For higher contrast, try using more pigment in the mix and use potassium
dichromate instead of ammonium dichromate. The more you recoat and reprint,
the more contrast will build up. Some of my prints have as many as ten
coatings. You can also experiment with subtle color shifts to emphasize
contrast. For example, if you have a print made with primarily warm tone
pigments (sienna, umber, etc...) try printing blue with a short exposure so
the effect is limited to the shadows. This will dramatically add 'punch' to
the image. Look at the "Gum Bichromate" section of my gallery to see
examples. All of these images used blue to some degree in the shadow areas.

Best regards from Big Wonderful Wyoming,
Dave Rose

> Hi All,
> In a similar way to Scott, I am up to my neck in the gum wars and have a
> couple of questions viz;
> I read somewhere in the 'canon' that good gumprints should not have a
> shine to the surface. After 3 or 4 coats mine do shine slightly . I have
> never seen a gumprint in the flesh so I must ask.
> Question 1.
> a) Shine or no shine?
> b) If no shine, how can I avoid it?
> I am trying to build up an image by the application of thin coats of
> pigment/gum. I've tried long exposures with little gum/pigment, short
> exposures with little gum/pigment and the same with lots of
> gum/pigment. The images lack 'punch' . All parts of the image seem to
> come up together..
> Question 2. How do get that shadow/highlight thing going?
> Regards
> David Hatton
Received on Tue May 24 07:15:35 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 06/02/05-10:12:02 AM Z CST