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

Re: Reproducing old papers

Expand Messages
  • idn17
    I hope this post goes through. I have just been forced to change to using verizon webmail, from something else, and it will not allow my posts through via
    Message 1 of 10 , Jan 12, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      I hope this post goes through. I have just been forced to change to using verizon webmail, from something else, and it will not allow my posts through via email So I am trying through the group. I set to text only, not HTML settings and it still wouldn't go. So Anthony....here goes. I may have to post from here in the future. If anyone knows a fix for this, please let me know!
      Iris...post follows below:
      *****************************************************************
      I just did some of these for someone yesterday, the plain nonpareil, heavy on the reds.
      The last few images look like old hand marbles to me, perhaps not machine made. The Victorians had the marbling machines, you can look up the patent drawings online somewhere, I forget. Long time ago I found them. Looks like a Rube Goldberg contraption (the cartoonist if no one knows who I mean!) It laid the color down in drops, even and regular. I am not sure how much human power was involved, but I think some at least. Still, the even regular zig zag lines like chevrons or Vs are more indicative on some of the papers of a marbling machine made paper. Not to knock them....I wish I had one for huge orders! You can do/mimic this by hand with raking the colors back and forth into a V pattern or Get Gel, then combing down. Laying the colors carefully in spots in rows helps too.

      When I want heavy on the reds, first of all, I found no better red than deep cadmium red. You have to know that cadmium has a high specific gravity. Meaning it weighs a lot. So if you make it really thick, say if you are diluting tube gouache or watercolor, and use less water, you may make it heavier than the size and it will SINK. Even if it looks great on the size, you don't see that a little may have started going just under, and is not available for contact with the paper. So you see red on the tray and come up with this awful liver colored thing on the paper. So often using more water, or just enough so it doesn't sink, this is what gives a brighter color. Opposite of what you would think.

      Being heavy, it also works a lot better on a cold day than a hot one, because the size breaks down a bit and thins in hot weather. If I have to do them on a hot day, I make them first, when the size is young and fresh and good consistency.

      As to the order of the colors, it will not be the same for all makes or brands. So i don't know what you are using. Saying acrylic or watercolor or oil doesn't answer the question either. People think all acrylic is made the same and all watercolor is made the same and so on. It is very different. Using my own colors, I lay down a lamp black first, as a GREY, pale. next I use a navy or the red. If I want predominant red, I will use that first. Then the blue and yellow over it. And a little sprinkling of gall water, to open up some "holes" because a little of the paper showing give the sheet some great contrast. I use the black first for the same reason. These two bring life to the paper. Real POP and WOW.

      People have more trouble with the red than anything. They did not use cad red back then, they often used a red they called "Oxford Brown" for that deep maroon. This substance was all used up and mined out 100 years back. They also used crimson lake, some other reds. I have found the cadmium to be a great substitute but it is tricky to work with at times.

      I like to lay my colors down rather pale. If you check my youtube videos you will see that. I have had people ordering paper, wanting to watch and supervise so I get the right color. I have let a couple of them over the years and they shriek when they see my black goes down grey, the red goes down pinkish. They don't understand at first how when you add colors, it brightens the previous colors. So please don't think making thicker color will give you darker paper. it will give mud, run-off and after it has all run, a pale paper.

      I should do another video....Wish I had thought of that yesterday!!! It will have to wait! Maybe in a few weeks. This marbler is building a little harp at the moment!

      I am here, talking about watercolor. Not acrylic. I have never gotten the right feel for these type papers/reproductions with acrylic, even when I made it myself. It just is not very suitable for repro work, not in my experience anyway. I have been hunting high and low for another red with no success, that can mimic the old papers. Vermillion is too orange, the earth reds are too brown. I have used some chemical reds and they all spread too much even with no gall. I stopped selling the cadmiums due to complaints from schools....heavy metals and all. I really don't need legal issues, so have it just for my own use. It is LEGAL, but anyone can sue anyone for anything and you still have to pay to defend yourself. So that was that. You can still buy it as watercolor or gouache. It is totally safe, just don't brush your teeth with it or feed it to anyone. Ridiculous I think, but .... anyway if anyone has found a different red that is good and not heavy metal based, please let us know. I have tossed out tons of pigments that didn't work, it is kind of discouraging, between that and the alum issues. Marbling used to be easier for sure!

      Iris Nevins
      www.marblingpaper.com

      --- In Marbling@yahoogroups.com, "anthonianthonianthoni" <anthonianthonianthoni@...> wrote:
      >
      > If you obeserve 19thc. combed marbled papers, you will observe that the colours arrange themselves in a very particular manner, with the red predominating, with the other colours appearing in fne veins here and there.
      > http://content.lib.washington.edu/cdm4/results.php?CISOOP1=all&CISOBOX1=Nonpareil&CISOFIELD1=patter&CISOOP2=exact&CISOBOX2=&CISOFIELD2=creato&CISOOP3=any&CISOBOX3=&CISOFIELD3=studio&CISOOP4=none&CISOBOX4=&CISOFIELD4=type&CISOROOT=/dp&t=s
      > Despite my efforts, I have been unable to reproudce such an effect.
      > Is there a particular manner in which the colours are laid on the size?
      >
      > Any advice is appreceated.
      >
      > Regards:
      > Anthony
      >
    • anthonianthonianthoni
      Dear Iris: The post has indeed went through, and what an informative post it is! *** You mention your search for a sutiable red for marbling in this your post.
      Message 2 of 10 , Jan 13, 2012
      • 0 Attachment
        Dear Iris:
        The post has indeed went through, and what an informative post it is!
        ***
        You mention your search for a sutiable red for marbling in this your post. I have used alizarin crimson, which seems to work quite well.The only problem is that the colour needs a lot of gall, and thus appears pink when the sheet is marbled. ( not a colour I would acualy recomend anyway. the colour is not really lightfast )
      • irisnevins
        Anthony ...the post went through only after three tries. I had to literally go over to the group site to re-post it. Thankfully I could copy and paste. I have
        Message 3 of 10 , Jan 14, 2012
        • 0 Attachment
          Anthony ...the post went through only after three tries. I had to literally go over to the group site to re-post it. Thankfully I could copy and paste.

          I have used Alizarin as well. If you add a little black to it, it looks better. One reason I avoid it is it is pretty fugitive. I don't want it turning brown or pink on someone's book in a few years. It is I believe related to Rose Madder. I do use Rose madder, because people want it, but I will use it as a pink. So far so good, though it is somewhat fugitive. With a blue mixed in, it is a lovely purple. The synthetic form of the Alizarin, or a sub for it would be a Quinacridone color I believe (going from memory!), a synthetic pigment. Often the synthetics work better than the pure real thing, and I counter my reputation as a purist....I am not, if something works better, use it. All the way down to my favorite marbling addition....plastic squeeze bottles. That does ruin the image, but I am sure any marbler long ago would have used them too if they could have had them! So see if you can locate some quinacridone type reddish paint. I have used them in acrylic making but not is watercolor. May give it another shot.

          Hopefully memory serves correctly on this! Anyway if you have alizarine, a little black in it works wonders in toning down the pink.
          Iris Nevins
          www.marblingpaper.com



          On 01/14/12, anthonianthonianthoni<anthonianthonianthoni@...> wrote:

          Dear Iris:
          The post has indeed went through, and what an informative post it is!
          ***
          You mention your search for a sutiable red for marbling in this your post. I have used alizarin crimson, which seems to work quite well.The only problem is that the colour needs a lot of gall, and thus appears pink when the sheet is marbled. ( not a colour I would acualy recomend anyway. the colour is not really lightfast )




          ------------------------------------

          Yahoo! Groups Links
        • anthonianthonianthoni
          I have tried your suggestion, and it works quite well. Well, I have tried cad. red for the first time today. as you have said, the colour is very heavy, and
          Message 4 of 10 , Jan 15, 2012
          • 0 Attachment
            I have tried your suggestion, and it works quite well.
            Well, I have tried cad. red for the first time today. as you have said, the colour is very heavy, and even though the ratio of dilution was about a pea sized lump of the former, to about 3 ounces of water, it spread sluggishly, and printed with a pale shade.
            do I need to dilute the colour further?
          • irisnevins
            Hi Anthony.... The biggest mistake everyone makes is thinking watercolor is watercolor, all same uniform formula from brand to brand, and acrylic the same.
            Message 5 of 10 , Jan 15, 2012
            • 0 Attachment
              Hi Anthony.... The biggest mistake everyone makes is thinking watercolor is watercolor, all same uniform formula from brand to brand, and acrylic the same. Are you, first of all, using watercolor or acrylic is the first question. Are you diluting either with what? And dispersing with what. Are you adding these so called additives that less traditional paint makers seem to think you need.

              Other questions you will not be able to answer will be how much dispersant did the maker use before it got to you. What kind, ox-gall (unlikely for most) or a detergent based...more likely, as detergent based dispersant spreads as you put it, SLUGGISHLY, when used with watercolor anyway. How much binder or filler do they put in. Do they use a pure pigment or one with chalk filler. They will not answer these questions, so all you can do is mention symptoms. Even acrylic. The more commercial tube ones, high on acrylic base, lower on pigment. Gouache will generally have more filler than tube watercolor. Tube watercolor may have none, but depends on the maker. They will all have a binder though, but how much.

              This is why I always recommend that people get their paints from a marbling supplier not an art store. I am not trying to make sales for myself, believe me I am not getting rich selling marbling paints, but I like that I have a good product that I know works and I can advise on it because I use it all the time. You can get paints made specifically for marbling elsewhere too, I don't really care where people go, so long as they can call or email "tech support" even while in the midst of marbling and generally get a quick answer. I am mostly here, but if I don't respond via email, if I am out, my phone forwards to my cell. So I may as well be here. I often get calls and if I am able to speak, will help, even if the person is not using my paint.

              So on your red, yes, I would try to thin it a bit more and see what happens. Is this something made specifically for marbling? There have been paints through the years that call themselves various types of marbling paint, and I was not too impressed by any of them. Myself, Nancy Morains at Colophon, and I don't know who else makes them who is also a steady marbler, we are the ones who understand how to tweak our materials. Marbling is never problem free. The formula day to day as to how much water to add, how much gall, will vary due to conditions. So our materials are not foolproof out of the bottle either, for anyone, especially a beginner. There is a large learning curve in dealing with general marbling quirks and problems.

              So my theory....try EVERYTHING. Maybe what you got needs to be thicker, who knows. If it has chalk filler it will decrease the weight so maybe making it denser will work. Chalk filler is not a bad thing, some pigments I have used only worked well with some filler, particularly the ultramarine and cad. red. The one cad red I have now is pure, and it is a bit more difficult but not bad, and the difficult is on my end making it. One it gets to the person using it there is no difference in how it acts. Once on the paper, there is no difference. This and other things, are reasons I chuckle when someone asks for "The Paint Formula". As I said before it is like asking for The Cake Recipe, like there is only one. It would be easier if there were just one size fits all, but not so. It gets pretty complicated, each pigment needing somewhat different handling. Add to that now, each manufacturer making an altogether different mix from each other.

              Anyway....hopefully I have not confused you more.
              Iris Nevins
              www.marblingpaper.com


              On 01/15/12, anthonianthonianthoni<anthonianthonianthoni@...> wrote:

              I have tried your suggestion, and it works quite well.
              Well, I have tried cad. red for the first time today. as you have said, the colour is very heavy, and even though the ratio of dilution was about a pea sized lump of the former, to about 3 ounces of water, it spread sluggishly, and printed with a pale shade.
              do I need to dilute the colour further?



              ------------------------------------

              Yahoo! Groups Links
            • anthonianthonianthoni
              The paint in question is red artist s watercolour. The dispersant is gall ( bovine) and the dilutent, water. Also, when I marble nonpareil, I use prussian
              Message 6 of 10 , Jan 16, 2012
              • 0 Attachment
                The paint in question is red artist's watercolour. The dispersant is gall ( bovine) and the dilutent, water.

                Also, when I marble nonpareil, I use prussian blue, but the blue spreads so much , that every colour is pushed out of the way.
              • irisnevins
                Hi Anthony The problem is that generally the manufacturer puts in a dispersant before you add ox-gall. Sometimes you need none for the tubes. I found way back
                Message 7 of 10 , Jan 17, 2012
                • 0 Attachment
                  Hi Anthony

                  The problem is that generally the manufacturer puts in a dispersant before you add ox-gall. Sometimes you need none for the tubes. I found way back when I used tubes or gouache or watercolor, that it would vary from batch to batch, the amount of dispersant, and thus, spread. There is no way to know what they use, but I would bet money on a detergent type, due to sluggish spread and TOO MUCH spread! I suspect that is the case with the Prussian Blue you are using. Try a different brand and see what happens. Some pigments naturally spread more. I use little and sometimes no gall in my Rose Madder for example.

                  You could try to mix the blue with some black if that spreads less, and get a nice navy blue?
                  Iris Nevins
                  www.marblingpaper.com


                  On 01/16/12, anthonianthonianthoni<anthonianthonianthoni@...> wrote:

                  The paint in question is red artist's watercolour. The dispersant is gall ( bovine) and the dilutent, water.

                  Also, when I marble nonpareil, I use prussian blue, but the blue spreads so much , that every colour is pushed out of the way.




                  ------------------------------------

                  Yahoo! Groups Links
                • anthonianthonianthoni
                  The maker in question of the pruss. blue ( I use it in a gouache) is Daler-rowney . The other colour I use, viz; yell. ocher still needs some gall. I think the
                  Message 8 of 10 , Jan 17, 2012
                  • 0 Attachment
                    The maker in question of the pruss. blue ( I use it in a gouache) is Daler-rowney . The other colour I use, viz; yell. ocher still needs some gall. I think the spreadiness is an inherent property with this blue, as I have used other brands, and the colour still spread a lot.
                    ****
                    To return to the subject of making nonpareils per se, I have chanced across another set of directions for making an nonpareil, which siginficantly differ from the more commonly used one.

                    I lay down the middle of the bath , a band of black.
                    II on either side of the band, make bull's eye spots of colours ( by dropping one colour on top of another, like what one does to test the paints)
                    III cross-stylus the pattern, then comb

                    see http://www.aboutbookbinding.com/Practical_Bookbinding/Marbling-Gilding-Headband-Edges-4.html, 3rd paragraph onwards

                    Has anyone ever tried this method before? do the results differ in any way to more conventional methods?
                  • anthonianthonianthoni
                    NOTA BENE: the link seems to be broken. To acess the article in question, go to http://www.aboutbookbinding.com/Practical_Bookbinding/Main.html and go to the
                    Message 9 of 10 , Jan 17, 2012
                    • 0 Attachment
                      NOTA BENE: the link seems to be broken. To acess the article in question, go to
                      http://www.aboutbookbinding.com/Practical_Bookbinding/Main.html
                      and go to the 4th part of "Marbling, Gilding the Edges and Headbanding " ,

                      --- In Marbling@yahoogroups.com, "anthonianthonianthoni" <anthonianthonianthoni@...> wrote:
                      >
                      > The maker in question of the pruss. blue ( I use it in a gouache) is Daler-rowney . The other colour I use, viz; yell. ocher still needs some gall. I think the spreadiness is an inherent property with this blue, as I have used other brands, and the colour still spread a lot.
                      > ****
                      > To return to the subject of making nonpareils per se, I have chanced across another set of directions for making an nonpareil, which siginficantly differ from the more commonly used one.
                      >
                      > I lay down the middle of the bath , a band of black.
                      > II on either side of the band, make bull's eye spots of colours ( by dropping one colour on top of another, like what one does to test the paints)
                      > III cross-stylus the pattern, then comb
                      >
                      > see http://www.aboutbookbinding.com/Practical_Bookbinding/Marbling-Gilding-Headband-Edges-4.html, 3rd paragraph onwards
                      >
                      > Has anyone ever tried this method before? do the results differ in any way to more conventional methods?
                      >
                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.