"The Pond - Moonlight" and the Gum-Bichromate Process

Hey, all.

I was most interested to see a photograph sell for more than $3 Million
CDN, but after seeing an on-line copy of the image I can understand why,
at least to some extent. Quite apart from its historial value, it is a
beautiful print, and given that it is a multiple-printed gum-bichromate
print involving various pigment layers, the production of the print is
quite an artisitic feat by itself.

I would be interested in trying the process myself, just out of
curiousity. I have a book that details the process, as well as many
other artistic but now-antiquated printing processes, but one of the
biggest problems is that gum-bichromate is a contact-printing process,
meaning the final image is only as large as the negative used to print it.
I would like to know the most efficient means of producing a large
negative (ie: 8x10, or 11x16 if possible) from a 35mm negative.

If anyone has any suggestions or can refer me to any resources, either
printed or online, I would be most greatful.

-Brian.

You might be interested in joining the mail list
, but I'm still interested in how this group
responds as well.
-Lew
"B. Anthony Cutteridge" wrote in message
news
Hey, all.

I was most interested to see a photograph sell for more than $3 Million
CDN, but after seeing an on-line copy of the image I can understand why,
at least to some extent. Quite apart from its historial value, it is a
beautiful print, and given that it is a multiple-printed gum-bichromate
print involving various pigment layers, the production of the print is
quite an artisitic feat by itself.

I would be interested in trying the process myself, just out of
curiousity. I have a book that details the process, as well as many
other artistic but now-antiquated printing processes, but one of the
biggest problems is that gum-bichromate is a contact-printing process,
meaning the final image is only as large as the negative used to print it.
I would like to know the most efficient means of producing a large
negative (ie: 8x10, or 11x16 if possible) from a 35mm negative.

If anyone has any suggestions or can refer me to any resources, either
printed or online, I would be most greatful.

-Brian.

In g, on 02/17/06
at 04:12 PM, "B. Anthony Cutteridge" said:

If anyone has any suggestions or can refer me to any resources, either
printed or online, I would be most greatful.

Go to the Photographer's Formulary. They hold workshops in Montana in
alternative processes. They also supply materials via mail order.

-
-----------------------------------------------------------
les clark / edgewater, nj / usa
-----------------------------------------------------------

B. Anthony Cutteridge" said:
If anyone has any suggestions or can refer me to any resources, either
printed or online, I would be most greatful.

The Keepers of Light: A History and Working Guide
to Early Photographic Processes

William Crawford

http://dogbert.abebooks.com/servlet/...+light+crawfor
d

& most libraries/inter-library-loan

--
Nicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio
Consulting Engineer: Electronics; Informatics; Photonics.
To reply, remove spaces: n o lindan at ix . netcom . com
Fstop timer - http://www.nolindan.com/da/fstop/index.htm

"B. Anthony Cutteridge" wrote in
message
news
Hey, all.

I was most interested to see a photograph sell for more
than $3 Million
CDN, but after seeing an on-line copy of the image I can
understand why,
at least to some extent. Quite apart from its historial
value, it is a
beautiful print, and given that it is a multiple-printed
gum-bichromate
print involving various pigment layers, the production of
the print is
quite an artisitic feat by itself.

I would be interested in trying the process myself, just
out of
curiousity. I have a book that details the process, as
well as many
other artistic but now-antiquated printing processes, but
one of the
biggest problems is that gum-bichromate is a
contact-printing process,
meaning the final image is only as large as the negative
used to print it.
I would like to know the most efficient means of producing
a large
negative (ie: 8x10, or 11x16 if possible) from a 35mm
negative.

If anyone has any suggestions or can refer me to any
resources, either
printed or online, I would be most greatful.

-Brian.

A Google search for "gum bichromate" returned lots of
sites. The basic process is simple but there are a great
many variations. I also recommend the alternative processes
mailing list. There is an archive of the list with
subsciption instructions at:


Archives:

All the messages sent to this list have been saved in an
archive. They
are available in two ways:

A browseable index on a web site at:

http://www.usask.ca/lists/alt-photo-process

There is "web mirror" of the current months messages at:

http://duke.usask.ca/~holtsg/photo/current


In fact, there is an on-going discussion of the best
methods of gum printing on the list now.


--
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA

In article g,
says...
Hey, all.

I was most interested to see a photograph sell for more than $3 Million
CDN, but after seeing an on-line copy of the image I can understand why,
at least to some extent. Quite apart from its historial value, it is a
beautiful print, and given that it is a multiple-printed gum-bichromate
print involving various pigment layers, the production of the print is
quite an artisitic feat by itself.

I would be interested in trying the process myself, just out of
curiousity. I have a book that details the process, as well as many
other artistic but now-antiquated printing processes, but one of the
biggest problems is that gum-bichromate is a contact-printing process,
meaning the final image is only as large as the negative used to print it.
I would like to know the most efficient means of producing a large
negative (ie: 8x10, or 11x16 if possible) from a 35mm negative.

If anyone has any suggestions or can refer me to any resources, either
printed or online, I would be most greatful.

-Brian.

Many people make "digital" negatives these days for contact printing
processes. Basically you scan your original and print it out at the
needed size on transparent film using an inkjet printer. You can do
all sorts of tonal corrections on the digital image that were difficult
or impossible with the all-film workflow that used to be the only
option.
--
Robert D Feinman
Landscapes, Cityscapes and Panoramic Photographs
http://robertdfeinman.com
mail:

On Sat, 18 Feb 2006 08:17:13 -0500, Robert Feinman wrote:

Many people make "digital" negatives these days for contact printing
processes. Basically you scan your original and print it out at the
needed size on transparent film using an inkjet printer. You can do
all sorts of tonal corrections on the digital image that were difficult
or impossible with the all-film workflow that used to be the only
option.

Of course!

You know, that possibility have never occured to me, but now that you
mention it it is certainly the most sensible as well as the most practical
method. Not only would it be easiest way to make a full-sheet negative
from a small one, but it also naturally makes it possible to also produce
a suitable full-sheet negative when one has no negative at all of the
desired picture but only a positive print.

Thank you very kindly for the brilliant idea!

-Brian.