[Alt-photo] paper for cyanotype (again)
Christina Z. Anderson
christinazanderson at gmail.com
Fri Dec 15 16:19:29 UTC 2017
You are right. I didn’t specify that paper. As I think I previously mentioned, I bought it ten years ago and never used it and it was only labeled Twinrocker so I don’t have record of the name, though I think it is Feather Deckle.
I expect a solution to “shoot through” a Japanese paper and I plan accordingly. In all the papers I have tested which have been suited for all sorts of uses—printmaking, watercolor, text wove etc., unsized and sized, uber thin and uber thick—the only two papers that did this for me like that were the Twinrocker FD and Zerkall Copperplate. ZC is unsized. Hahnemuhle Copperplate has no surface sizing and little internal and performs beautifully with no shoot through, so it doesn’t necessarily follow intended use. Canson U Sketch, 12¢ a sheet, and thinner than heck, doesn’t bleed through. Neither did Clearprint 1000H which is a great paper (although I prefer the 1020H).
The reason I don’t like the shoot through on Twinrocker FD (and ZC) is that the solution got stuck in the paper and would not clear out even with extended washing, and fogged, just like Don’s experience.
But I’ll be forewarned if, as you say below, a number of their papers do this. With the set of 4x5 samples it should be quick to test that.
Speaking of shoot through (there must be a better term) the Awagami Platinum Gampi from Freestyle is one Japanese paper that doesn’t do this. It coats like a charm and stays on the paper surface, which has quite a beautiful ecru sheen.
One last thought: I calculated that cyanotype costs about a nickel an 11x15, so it’s not like I am ever worried about using too much solution on these thirsty papers. I can do all this paper testing with abandon because the cost is only in the paper itself really. With all the testing you did for Arentz’ book I can’t imagine the cost.
Christina Z. Anderson
> On Dec 14, 2017, at 6:45 PM, Keith Schreiber <keith at jkschreiber.com> wrote:
> I intentionally didn't address my comments to anyone in particular, but I think you just made my point, Chris ;) This was obviously not Twinrocker Watercolor. That would not happen on any surface-sized watercolor paper. Usually (not always) it only happens on waterleaf (unsized) papers like Arches 88 and certain subspecies of Rives BFK, as well as some unsized washi.
> All Twinrocker papers, except those marked “Printmaking or Letterpress” are suitable for all media, including water-based materials such as pen and ink. Watercolor paper is given an additional “surface” or “tub” sizing of gelatine.
> I have tried the White Printmaking and the Cream (Sweet Cream) and maybe 1 or 2 others, and all behaved exactly as you described. The only one that didn't is the White Watercolor.
> The way their website is built I can't give a direct link to the page, but if you go to this link then be sure "White Watercolor" is selected in the Twinrocker Watercolor Paper section and click Go. That will take you to the right place.
> https://www.twinrockerhandmadepaper.com/pa_main.php <https://www.twinrockerhandmadepaper.com/pa_main.php>
>> On Dec 14, 2017, at 4:39 PM, Christina Z. Anderson via Alt-photo-process-list <alt-photo-process-list at lists.altphotolist.org <mailto:alt-photo-process-list at lists.altphotolist.org>> wrote:
>> But the Twinrocker paper I had, the coating solution shot right through to the back so badly I chucked it.
More information about the Alt-photo-process-list