Re: acetone

Dick,

Have you seen any older carbons, say 1800's , that had significant
relief? I viewed quite a few naked carbons from the 1800's at the
SFMOMA. I held them in my hands and inspected them closely. No
relief. The book "Keepers of the Light" talks about how to identify
older carbons. No talk of relief. Apparently Crawford hasn't seen
any either. I'm wondering if making carbons with significant relief
is a recent phenomenon. To me, if transferring to FOP, relief almost
becomes a necessity. Otherwise you've got a print that's virtually
indistinguishable from a silver print. At that point one might
ask: "What's the point?". From what I understand, carbon came
about as a result of silver prints fading noticeably in high
pollution areas, not because folks were looking for something that
was aesthetically more pleasing than a silver print. Of course what
I say does not apply when transferring to watercolor paper. Even
though such prints resemble platinum/palladium prints, looking at
them fairly closely reveals quite clearly that they're something
different.

Eric.

On Dec 22, 2006, at 10:52 AM, Richard Sullivan wrote:

>
> High relief is an issue of personal taste. I think it is somewhat
> like
> brush marks on a pt print. I think it is an interesting and novel
> idea for
> portfolio prints, but once under glass in a frame, it is not that
> visible. I
> am sort of neutral on the subject. I think it would be nice for
> some prints
> and immaterial for others.
>
> --Dick
_______________________________________________
Post to the list as PLAIN TEXT only - no HTML
carbon mailing list
carbon@spitbite.org
FAQ at http://spitbite.org/carbon/list.html
Received on Fri Dec 22 19:26:56 2006