- When discussing these papers as a group, I usually describe them as "chemically altered patterns" or "chemically altered spot patterns", which is basically what they are (with a few exceptions - always exceptions): spot patterns where the primary effect can only be achieved through the addition of other substances/chemicals to the paint: oil, turpentine, soap, wax, potassium hydroxide, alum and a number of other chemicals. They all developed in the 1750-1850 period that corresponded to the exponential growth of the science of chemistry and the industrial revolution. I can imagine marblers of the time, likely out of boredom, grabbing anything they could find to see what would turn out and there was no attempt to analyze the science behind marbling until Joseph Halfer, but by that time these patterns had declined in favor and he did not address them - he apparently marketed a Tiger Eye solution but did not discuss it in his book. Paul Adam did analyze the effects of the different chemicals on the production of Tiger Eye Pattern but not until the 1920s when most of these patterns were all but extinct.
--- In Marbling@yahoogroups.com, "anthonianthonianthoni" <anthonianthonianthoni@...> wrote:
> Perhaps you should call this group "[chemicaly] enhanced patterns". I don't think that calling them simply "enhanced" patterns is good, as it suggests that you cannot nake a proper marbled paper without adding oil, soda or potash to it....
> But that said, "chemicaly enhanced pattern" does not really roll off the tounge- any other suggestions? ( P'haps [heaven forbid!] a Latin or greek word?)