Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Digital collection

Expand Messages
  • hamburgerbuntpapier_de
    Now I ve finally found the time to glance through the pictures, and I feel there are some things I should say. Croisé would be dribbled paper; my French
    Message 1 of 10 , Dec 3, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      Now I've finally found the time to glance through the pictures, and I
      feel there are some things I should say.

      Croisé would be dribbled paper; my French customers use the term
      papier coulé.

      The 'bench marbled papers' are not marbled at all, as is mentiones
      somewhere on the site. The term is just another piece of evidence for
      the dominating role of marbled papers among all decorated papers, now
      and in centuries gone by. Most of those 'bench marbled papers' were
      made in sprinkled techniques.

      Tourniquet and Agathe patterns are not the same. The term tourniquet I
      have never heard before; the correct term in German is Gustavpapier.
      Agathe is definitely wrong, that's a girls' name. What I suppose they
      mean is agate paper, agates being semi precious gems. Some agate
      stones have feathery veins very close to those on the agate papers.

      Gustavpapier is what is shown on the other photoes, i.e. sprinkeled
      with ragged edges and rims in contrasting colours. These contrasting
      colours are achieved by additives to the paints. Sprinkles in agate
      papers are monochrome, predominantly black, with feathery edges. There
      is no agate among the 45 pictures. No. 11 is a sprinkled paper, the
      others called tourniquet are Gustav patterns.

      If the dating of 1713 as mentioned for no. 37 is right, I'll eat my
      hat. Both Gustav and agate papers were 19th century, mostly produced
      in industrial or at least semi-industrial process (and to reproduce
      them by hand is hellish). While it is perfectly possible that the book
      mentioned was bound for the first time, this happenend certainly not
      in 1713 with this very cover paper. Another possibility is that, while
      the binding was not touched, only the covering paper was changed into
      something more modern, an effect frequently seen by restorers. This
      would leave the first binding intact and is, if done on a high
      professional level, only visible for a specialist.

      Susanne Krause
    • momo
      Hi Renato, this is a most valuable resource, for both the photos (excellent quality) but for the descriptions of techniques and methods. This does not surprise
      Message 2 of 10 , Dec 4, 2007
      • 0 Attachment
        Hi Renato,

        this is a most valuable resource, for both the photos (excellent
        quality) but for the descriptions of techniques and methods. This does
        not surprise me as the people at the library there are truly dedicated
        to the quality of their work and committed to making their collections
        available to the public via the web.

        Thank you so much for sharing this resource with the group.

        Happy Holidays;
        momora



        --- In Marbling@yahoogroups.com, "Renato" <renatocrepaldi808@...> wrote:
        >
        > http://content.lib.washington.edu/

        > All the Best,
        > Renato Crepaldi.
        >
      • momo
        hi Suzanne, There is a form at http://content.lib.washington.edu/contact.html to submit these comments to the library s special collection. The researchers
        Message 3 of 10 , Dec 4, 2007
        • 0 Attachment
          hi Suzanne,

          There is a form at http://content.lib.washington.edu/contact.html to
          submit these comments to the library's special collection. The
          researchers would appreciate hearing these and would research further
          to promote the accuracy of their documentation. Since, they allow us
          to use this resource free of charge, you may want to share your
          comments with them. I would do it but these are your comments and if
          they inquired I could help them.

          Thanks you for sharing your knowledge with us.
          momora


          --- In Marbling@yahoogroups.com, "hamburgerbuntpapier_de" <studio@...>
          wrote:
          >
          > Now I've finally found the time to glance through the pictures, and
          I feel there are some things I should say.
          >
          > Susanne Krause
          >
        • Jake Benson
          Hi Susanne, The terms Papier Tourniquet, Papier Coulé, and Papier Croisé are all found in Fichtenberg s Papiers Des Fanatasie. Paris, 1852. Samples that
          Message 4 of 10 , Dec 5, 2007
          • 0 Attachment
            Hi Susanne,


            The terms Papier Tourniquet, Papier Coulé, and Papier Croisé are
            all found in Fichtenberg's Papiers Des Fanatasie. Paris, 1852. Samples
            that closely match the images in the database can be found on "Cartes
            d'Echantillons" samples at the back of the book. Planche 2 "Papier
            marbrés d'Anglaise et Francais", nos. 11 (Coulé), 12 (Croisé),
            and 13 (Tourniquet).

            Also shown on the same leaf, no. 16, is a sample of "Papier Agathes" is
            As you say, the sample is not the same as Papier Tourniquet. It has
            features somewhat reminiscent of the Papier Croisé, but it is not
            exactly the same. I do believe the term is derived from "agate" stone,
            but I also know that there is a term "cailloute", although I wonder if
            the latter is appled more often for what we call "shell" in English.

            If you look at the samples on the site for the Papier Croisé, it does
            mention that it is one of the three styles of d'Annonay papers:

            <http://content.lib.washington.edu/cdm4/results.php?CISOOP1=all&CISOBOX1\
            =Papier%20Croise&CISOFIELD1=patter&CISOOP2=none&CISOBOX2=&CISOFIELD2=pat\
            ter&CISOOP3=any&CISOBOX3=&CISOFIELD3=studio&CISOOP4=none&CISOBOX4=&CISOF\
            IELD4=type&CISOROOT=/dp>

            "This pattern is amongst the d'Annonay papiers attributed by Wolfe (pg
            113) to F.M. Montgolfier beginning around 1830.

            Papier Coulé is one of the three types of Annonay papiers.
            Identifying this amongst the three styles of Annonay papiers
            distinguishes them as amongst the two Wolfe categories of 'imitation or
            pseudo-marbled' papers attributed to French creation (Wolfe paraphrasing
            M. Fichtenberg also suggests that both the Germans and the French made
            versions of each others' pseudo-marbles at the same time so discerning
            the absolute country of origin varies often). All three of the Annonay
            papiers were, according to Wolfe, created in the same basic way though
            their end results came from the way in which they were finished be it
            splattered, sponged, etc.

            Papier Coulé is related to the other Annonay papers but is closest in
            appearance and creation to Papier Croisé. The difference being that
            in a Croisé the wet paste is allowed to trickle in multiple
            directions whereas a Coulé is only run in a single direction."

            Personally, I wonder use of the term "Turkish" routinely applied solely
            to "spot" or "stone" patterns in the database seems to me a bit
            antiquated and imprecise. The use of the term "Turkish" was once used
            by many European writers (though there are notable exceptions such as
            Sir Thomas Herbert) to describe all marbled papers. The sample book of
            the Augsburg manufacturer Georg Christoph Stoy, which Haemmerle thought
            dated to about 1730, shows combed designs, rather than spots, associated
            with this term (see Wolfe, p 21 and plate IX). About 250 years later,
            Halfer uses the term "Turkish" only for spot patterns in his "Progress
            of the Marbling Art".

            Jake Benson

            --- In Marbling@yahoogroups.com, "hamburgerbuntpapier_de" <studio@...>
            wrote:
            >
            > Now I've finally found the time to glance through the pictures, and I
            > feel there are some things I should say.
            >
            > Croisé would be dribbled paper; my French customers use the term
            > papier coulé.
            >
            > The 'bench marbled papers' are not marbled at all, as is mentiones
            > somewhere on the site. The term is just another piece of evidence for
            > the dominating role of marbled papers among all decorated papers, now
            > and in centuries gone by. Most of those 'bench marbled papers' were
            > made in sprinkled techniques.
            >
            > Tourniquet and Agathe patterns are not the same. The term tourniquet I
            > have never heard before; the correct term in German is Gustavpapier.
            > Agathe is definitely wrong, that's a girls' name. What I suppose they
            > mean is agate paper, agates being semi precious gems. Some agate
            > stones have feathery veins very close to those on the agate papers.
            >
            > Gustavpapier is what is shown on the other photoes, i.e. sprinkeled
            > with ragged edges and rims in contrasting colours. These contrasting
            > colours are achieved by additives to the paints. Sprinkles in agate
            > papers are monochrome, predominantly black, with feathery edges. There
            > is no agate among the 45 pictures. No. 11 is a sprinkled paper, the
            > others called tourniquet are Gustav patterns.
            >
            > If the dating of 1713 as mentioned for no. 37 is right, I'll eat my
            > hat. Both Gustav and agate papers were 19th century, mostly produced
            > in industrial or at least semi-industrial process (and to reproduce
            > them by hand is hellish). While it is perfectly possible that the book
            > mentioned was bound for the first time, this happenend certainly not
            > in 1713 with this very cover paper. Another possibility is that, while
            > the binding was not touched, only the covering paper was changed into
            > something more modern, an effect frequently seen by restorers. This
            > would leave the first binding intact and is, if done on a high
            > professional level, only visible for a specialist.
            >
            > Susanne Krause
            >



            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • Susanne Krause
            Hi Jake, sorry for the delay, I ve been up to the neck in a big project. There is primarily one aspect I feel needs to be kept in mind in this connection. If
            Message 5 of 10 , Dec 10, 2007
            • 0 Attachment
              Hi Jake,

              sorry for the delay, I've been up to the neck in a big project.

              There is primarily one aspect I feel needs to be kept in mind in this
              connection. If a classification is given to illustrate the contents
              of Fichtenberg's book written 150 years ago, then it must be declared
              as such and everything is as it should be. If, on the other hand, a
              classification is meant to be useful today to a person in need of a
              term to describe a decorated paper unknown to them, the latest
              findings of researchers in the words of today are what is needed to
              make the meaning clear today, as much as we don't any longer thee and
              thou each other.

              It begins with the fact that none of those patterns is a marbled
              pattern and that, for the patterns in question, the term papier marbré
              has been discarded today in favour of papier decoré, and it doesn't
              end there.

              That virtually all decorated papers have been called marbled quite
              frequently in the past centuries does not imply that we should keep
              that mode of speaking up.

              Susanne Krause

              --- In Marbling@yahoogroups.com, "Jake Benson" <jemiljan@...> wrote:
              >
              > Hi Susanne,
              >
              >
              > The terms Papier Tourniquet, Papier Coulé, and Papier Croisé are
              > all found in Fichtenberg's Papiers Des Fanatasie. Paris, 1852. Samples
              > that closely match the images in the database can be found on "Cartes
              > d'Echantillons" samples at the back of the book. Planche 2 "Papier
              > marbrés d'Anglaise et Francais", nos. 11 (Coulé), 12 (Croisé),
              > and 13 (Tourniquet).
              >
              > Also shown on the same leaf, no. 16, is a sample of "Papier Agathes" is
              > As you say, the sample is not the same as Papier Tourniquet. It has
              > features somewhat reminiscent of the Papier Croisé, but it is not
              > exactly the same. I do believe the term is derived from "agate" stone,
              > but I also know that there is a term "cailloute", although I wonder if
              > the latter is appled more often for what we call "shell" in English.
              >
              > If you look at the samples on the site for the Papier Croisé, it does
              > mention that it is one of the three styles of d'Annonay papers:
              >
              >
              <http://content.lib.washington.edu/cdm4/results.php?CISOOP1=all&CISOBOX1\
              >
              =Papier%20Croise&CISOFIELD1=patter&CISOOP2=none&CISOBOX2=&CISOFIELD2=pat\
              >
              ter&CISOOP3=any&CISOBOX3=&CISOFIELD3=studio&CISOOP4=none&CISOBOX4=&CISOF\
              > IELD4=type&CISOROOT=/dp>
              >
              > "This pattern is amongst the d'Annonay papiers attributed by Wolfe (pg
              > 113) to F.M. Montgolfier beginning around 1830.
              >
              > Papier Coulé is one of the three types of Annonay papiers.
              > Identifying this amongst the three styles of Annonay papiers
              > distinguishes them as amongst the two Wolfe categories of 'imitation or
              > pseudo-marbled' papers attributed to French creation (Wolfe paraphrasing
              > M. Fichtenberg also suggests that both the Germans and the French made
              > versions of each others' pseudo-marbles at the same time so discerning
              > the absolute country of origin varies often). All three of the Annonay
              > papiers were, according to Wolfe, created in the same basic way though
              > their end results came from the way in which they were finished be it
              > splattered, sponged, etc.
              >
              > Papier Coulé is related to the other Annonay papers but is closest in
              > appearance and creation to Papier Croisé. The difference being that
              > in a Croisé the wet paste is allowed to trickle in multiple
              > directions whereas a Coulé is only run in a single direction."
              >
              > Personally, I wonder use of the term "Turkish" routinely applied solely
              > to "spot" or "stone" patterns in the database seems to me a bit
              > antiquated and imprecise. The use of the term "Turkish" was once used
              > by many European writers (though there are notable exceptions such as
              > Sir Thomas Herbert) to describe all marbled papers. The sample book of
              > the Augsburg manufacturer Georg Christoph Stoy, which Haemmerle thought
              > dated to about 1730, shows combed designs, rather than spots, associated
              > with this term (see Wolfe, p 21 and plate IX). About 250 years later,
              > Halfer uses the term "Turkish" only for spot patterns in his "Progress
              > of the Marbling Art".
              >
              > Jake Benson
              >
              > --- In Marbling@yahoogroups.com, "hamburgerbuntpapier_de" <studio@>
              > wrote:
              > >
              > > Now I've finally found the time to glance through the pictures, and I
              > > feel there are some things I should say.
              > >
              > > Croisé would be dribbled paper; my French customers use the term
              > > papier coulé.
              > >
              > > The 'bench marbled papers' are not marbled at all, as is mentiones
              > > somewhere on the site. The term is just another piece of evidence for
              > > the dominating role of marbled papers among all decorated papers, now
              > > and in centuries gone by. Most of those 'bench marbled papers' were
              > > made in sprinkled techniques.
              > >
              > > Tourniquet and Agathe patterns are not the same. The term tourniquet I
              > > have never heard before; the correct term in German is Gustavpapier.
              > > Agathe is definitely wrong, that's a girls' name. What I suppose they
              > > mean is agate paper, agates being semi precious gems. Some agate
              > > stones have feathery veins very close to those on the agate papers.
              > >
              > > Gustavpapier is what is shown on the other photoes, i.e. sprinkeled
              > > with ragged edges and rims in contrasting colours. These contrasting
              > > colours are achieved by additives to the paints. Sprinkles in agate
              > > papers are monochrome, predominantly black, with feathery edges. There
              > > is no agate among the 45 pictures. No. 11 is a sprinkled paper, the
              > > others called tourniquet are Gustav patterns.
              > >
              > > If the dating of 1713 as mentioned for no. 37 is right, I'll eat my
              > > hat. Both Gustav and agate papers were 19th century, mostly produced
              > > in industrial or at least semi-industrial process (and to reproduce
              > > them by hand is hellish). While it is perfectly possible that the book
              > > mentioned was bound for the first time, this happenend certainly not
              > > in 1713 with this very cover paper. Another possibility is that, while
              > > the binding was not touched, only the covering paper was changed into
              > > something more modern, an effect frequently seen by restorers. This
              > > would leave the first binding intact and is, if done on a high
              > > professional level, only visible for a specialist.
              > >
              > > Susanne Krause
              > >
              >
              >
              >
              > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              >
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.