Re: Gum problem(s)

From: Yves Gauvreau ^lt;>
Date: 11/20/05-07:01:46 PM Z
Message-id: <064a01c5ee37$2545f1c0$0100a8c0@BERTHA>


After reading what as been said here and elsewhere I would say that all of
you are probably both right and wrong at the same time. I'm the curious guy
who ask this question and I realize that no ones situation is the same and
even the reference they cite may have been made in condition that don't even
apply to gum at all.

I think the best answer I would give now goes something like this, try some
of the suggestions you'll receive and if you find one that works for you
just stick with it especially if you like the results.

I know, this is not a "good" scientific response but are we trying to do
science or "ART"? I plead guilty in kind of asking for a specific answer but
I'm sure now that even if I knew everything that happens molecule by
molecule when I expose the stuff it wouldn't help a tiny bit in creating a

Thanks to you all your thought, explanation and everything else, all of
these have been more useful then you can think.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Dave Rose" <>
To: <>
Sent: Sunday, November 20, 2005 12:32 PM
Subject: Re: Gum problem(s)

> Regarding the question of whether humidity affects gum printing exposure
> times.
> I've printed gum in both New Jersey (high humidity) and Wyoming (low
> humidity). I've not seen any discernable change to exposure due to
> humidity. The biggest change related to fluctuating humidity levels is
> overall dimension of the paper during recoating and reprinting multiple
> layers.
> Best regards,
> Dave Rose
> Big Wonderful Wyoming
Received on Sun Nov 20 19:00:12 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 12/01/05-02:04:50 PM Z CST