Baren Digest              Thursday, 3 October 2002      Volume 21 : Number 1980


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

From: Charles Morgan <cmorgan#uvic.ca>
Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2002 06:59:00 -0700
Subject: [Baren 19387] Re: Hanga Design 

 Hey, talk about "salon d'embarrass", I'm more of the school "saloon of 
bareass" ... talk about being artistically challenged, I am the paradigm ...

So, if I can give it a try, trust me ... you will not be embarrassed by 
your own efforts ... There has to be a first time some time, so you may as 
well get over the worry of it sooner rather than later. Besides, you will 
NEVER learn it if you do not try [... add your favorite trite truisms and 
cliches here ...]

Come on in ... the water (color) is fine ....

Cheers ..... Charles

At 06:44 AM 10/2/02 -0500, you wrote:

>Hey, Jeanne!  I don't think Graham is on the Baren, but I happily add my 
>encouragement to his -- it appears that Exchange 15 will be <mostly> first 
>time hanga printers so you'll be in good company...  there will be quite a 
>number of 1st time hanga printers in this exchange -- so this may be just 
>the incentive you've been waiting for, so go ahead...  SIGN UP !!
>
>:o)
>
>Mike
>
>At 07:36 AM 10/2/2002 -0400, Jeanne N. Chase wrote:

>><snip>...
>>You are right though, this makes you get into the Hanga printing, which I
>>have been avoiding now for three years. I am at home with the oily stuff.
>>So , good for you. If there is not a full sign up or I might get on the
>>waiting list, do a Hanga, and maybe it might make it.
>>I do not know if Graham is on the Baren or not, but he has been nagging me
>>(in a nice way), to get into Hanga printing.
>>Good Luck
>>Jeanne N.

>
>
>Mike Lyon
>mailto:mikelyon#mlyon.com
>http://www.mlyon.com



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

From: "Maria Arango" <maria#mariarango.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2002 07:22:03 -0700
Subject: [Baren 19388] Re: Hanga Design 


>Besides, you will
> NEVER learn it if you do not try [... add your favorite trite truisms and
> cliches here ...]
>
> Come on in ... the water (color) is fine ....
>
> Cheers ..... Charles
>


The turtle only makes progress when he sticks his neck out.
Nothing ventured, nothing gained.
A ship in a harbor is safe, but that's not what ships are made for.
Ad inexplorate! (Toward the unknown)
Only those who dare to fail greatly can ever achieve greatly.
Thunder is good, thunder is fine, but it is lightning that does the work.
You can't cross a chasm in two small jumps.

Chaaaaaaaaaaaaarge! :-)
Hey, you asked...
Maria

<><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
Maria Arango
Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
http://www.1000woodcuts.com
maria#mariarango.com
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><>


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

From: Brenda Everett <laprovence2001#yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2002 08:25:10 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Baren 19389] Re: Baren Digest V21 #1978 

Hello All...

My name is Brenda Everett and I have been on Baren a
few weeks.  I went to Graham's bootcamp June 2002...
so Hanga is pretty new to me. I am a new graduate of
Portland State Univ. in Drawing, painting and
printmaking.  I've mostly done aquatint, collographs,
linocuts, Keith Howard's Ultra-Image On and other
experiments in zinc plates.

Anyway, now that you know something about me, I just
have to ask Sharri why speedball ink is so bad.  I
used it as a student in Design class... I don't prefer
it, but just want to get the full scoop! 

Thanks
Brenda 



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

From: Mike Lyon <mikelyon#mlyon.com>
Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2002 10:58:49 -0500
Subject: [Baren 19390] Re: Baren Digest V21 #1978 

Hi, Brenda, and welcome!

- -- Mike

At 08:25 AM 10/2/2002 -0700, you wrote:

>My name is Brenda Everett and I have been on Baren a
>few weeks.  I went to Graham's bootcamp June 2002...
>so Hanga is pretty new to me. I am a new graduate of
>Portland State Univ. in Drawing, painting and
>printmaking.  I've mostly done aquatint, collographs,
>linocuts, Keith Howard's Ultra-Image On and other
>experiments in zinc plates.


Mike Lyon
mailto:mikelyon#mlyon.com
http://www.mlyon.com 

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

From: "lmhtwb" <lmhtwb#prodigy.net>
Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2002 09:08:40 -0700
Subject: [Baren 19391] Re: Hardwood / softwood question:  LONG BORING Answer  

>From Mike Lyon:


> Hey, Linda H, if you're out there...  You gave me a terrific description

of

> wood types and the differences between hardwood and softwood and open and
> closed grain hardwoods...  I can't remember everything you told me, but I
> thought it was great!  Would you repeat your description on-line?


No -- you shouldn't have deleted my email before you memorized it.  *eg*
(It's Wednesday -- my designated grumpy day.  Hahaha!)  But since you asked
nicely and everyone has been very helpful in answering my hanga questions,
.....  then again, boring these helpful people with botanical 'trivia' might
cause them to ignore my future questions because they assume it's more
boring stuff.  Hmm, the dilemma.

Warning:  Long, boring botanical lecture to follow.

The question on the table is what is a hardwood vs. softwood.  I'm not
referring to the ease of carving, but to the lumber designation.

The common definitions of these terms are "a softwood is from
evergreens/conifers" and "a hardwood is from deciduous trees".  (Deciduous,
for those that don't know, means the tree loses its leaves in the fall.)
Now I will admit two things about these definitions -- (1) they are
basically correct if you live in the USA and (2) you hear them frequently
from 'experts'.  But "basically" and and "frequently" does not make them
true.

Here's one problem with the definition of softwood -- larch.  A larch is a
needle-leafed, cone-bearing tree which sheds its needles in fall.  It's a
deciduous conifer, or as one student put on an exam, "a deciduous
evergreen".  (He got that question marked wrong, even if it made me laugh.)
So, softwood can not be synonymous with evergreen.

One problem with the definition of hardwood is mahogany.  Mahogany, no
matter the species, is a broad-leaf, fruit-bearing tree which is evergreen.
Most tropical hardwoods are evergreen.  Thus hardwoods can't be defined as
wood from deciduous trees.

Now, some people then try to redefine the wood types by leaf structure --
softwoods have needles, and hardwoods have broad-leaves.  Doesn't work
either.  Gingko is the problem here.  Gingko has fan shaped leaves, is
deciduous, and bears fleshy cones, and is botanically closer related to the
pine trees than apple trees.  It is a broad-leaf tree with softwood.

So what IS the definition?  Softwood comes from gymnosperms, which are
seed-bearing plants that do not flower, such as gingko, pine, larch, yew,
and cycads.  Hardwood comes from angiosperms, which are seed-bearing plants
that flower, such as maple, cherry, basswood, and oak.  (Now, if you want to
fudge on the softwood definition and say softwoods come from conifers,
that's marginally okay as long as you understand that not all cones are
hard, dry things.  Both yew and gingko produce fleshy cones.)

This is more than just a classification game by bored botanists.  There are
structural differences between the two woods.  The water bearing cells in a
gymnosperm are only tracheids, which as thin, long cells.  These tracheids
form loooong columns which is in part why softwoods is easy to work. Also,
gymnosperms have a small percentage of fiber cells in the wood.  In
angiosperms, the cells are mainly vessel members with some tracheids also
present.  Now, these vessel members are short, fat little things so they
along with a larger proportion of fibers create the strong, dense wood of
most hardwoods.  (Trees like balsa are fascinating anatomically -- same
parts, but oh so different!)  Fibers are found in both woods and are
basically the same length.

BTW, hardwoods can be divided into ring porous wood and diffuse porous wood,
plus a number of intermediates.  Ring porous wood, such as oak, catalpa, and
pecan, has concentrations of large vessels in the early growth of wood each
year and then less in the later part of the year.  Diffuse porous wood, such
as maple, basswood, and beech, have their vessels evenly scattered
throughout the year's wood.  Walnut, cherry, and butternut are examples of
intermediates.  Now (and here's the printing application) it's the vessel
organization in hardwoods which account for the grain patterns in prints.
The more ring porous the wood is, the more 'grainy' it prints and the more
difficult it is to carve.

And that's the end of today's lecture.  So, one make it thru all this???
Hahaha.

Linda



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

From: Mike Lyon <mikelyon#mlyon.com>
Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2002 11:16:39 -0500
Subject: [Baren 19392] Re: Hardwood / softwood question:  LONG BORING Answer 

Thanks, Linda!  That was excellent!  Even better than the off-list 
lecture!   :-)

Mike

At 09:08 AM 10/2/2002 -0700, you wrote:

>And that's the end of today's lecture.  So, one make it thru all this???
>Hahaha.
>
>Linda
>


Mike Lyon
mailto:mikelyon#mlyon.com
http://www.mlyon.com 


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

From: pulpfic#sunshinecable.com
Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2002 09:44:28 -0700
Subject: [Baren 19393] Speedball inks 


>I think Dan is being paid by the Speedball people.
>Is there anyone out there who also uses Speedball ink?(and loves it like Dan)
>Kidding aside, your work is wonderful, I only hope it is still visible in 25
>years.
>
>Jeanne N.


Hi Jeanne,

I, too, use Speedball inks, and like how they work. 

There is no reason for the prints Not to be visible in 25 and many more
years - the pigments used in Speedball inks are lightfast in all but a
couple of unnecessary colours. Magenta fades quickly and the pre-mixed
orange skews, but as long as one knows Not to use these for good work, all
is well.

Some of us are confident enough in who we are and what we do to let the
ink-snobbery blow right on by 8^)

Randi



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

From: "marilynn smih" <marilynnsmih#hotmail.com>
Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2002 09:44:44 -0700
Subject: [Baren 19394] Re: Baren Digest V21 #1979 

I recieved this message from gilda Zimmerling regarding the 14a exchange:
Dear Marilyn. I am sorry to say that I will not be able to finish my prints 
for exchange 14a. My two year old daughter had to go back into the hospital 
on Friday and is still there. As you can image I can only think of her at 
this time. Gilda

I had hoped she might get them to me before mailing out this exchange.  But 
due to her situation it would seem we have lost one participant.
I wish Gilda, her family and especially her daughter good and comforting 
wishes and thoughts.
Gilda, I hope your daughter is well and home with you soon.
It would seem we now have 21 participants.  Anyone who has mailed out their 
prints will recieve back the extra in their packets.
Marilynn



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

From: Charles Morgan <cmorgan#uvic.ca>
Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2002 09:52:20 -0700
Subject: [Baren 19395] Re: Baren Digest V21 #1978 

Hey, Brenda!!!!

Glad to hear from you again. Welcome to Baren.

Cheers .... Charles




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

From: "Lee and Barbara Mason" <lbmason71#attbi.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2002 10:18:40 -0700
Subject: [Baren 19396] Speedball inks 

Randi,
This was just too funny. Ink snobbery......by people who use ink all the
time and all types of ink. I almost fell off the chair laughing.

I think speedball has its place and is good ink for what it is used for. I
think the pigments are light fast. After that it is a question of what you
want the ink to do. The colors are very limited and the inks are not highly
pigmented. This leaves a lot to be desired for most artists. However, I like
these inks and certainly use them a lot with good results. I admit it do not
use them in the work I exhibit as I desire more colors and work with very
transparent inks. Speedball will not hold up to either of these criteria. So
it limits artists in how they can work with it. It has a bad rap, mostly
because of the low pigment to binder ratio. But if you are just printing a
specific color and straight out of the tube, it is probably fine to use it.
Dan Dew is a master at it and I do not think other ink would make his work
better, just different. I really like the fact that it rewets, like
watercolor. A really good feature for some processes.

I still think ink snobbery was sooooo funny. I want to remember this and use
it when I teach...I know it will get a laugh.
Barbara



> Some of us are confident enough in who we are and what we do to let the
> ink-snobbery blow right on by 8^)
>
> Randi





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

From: Charles Morgan <cmorgan#uvic.ca>
Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2002 11:56:25 -0700
Subject: [Baren 19397] Re: Hardwood / softwood question:  LONG BORING Answer 

Ahhhh, Linda ... you silver tongued siren ... I think I am in love ....

Cheers ....... Charles

At 09:08 AM 10/2/02 -0700, you wrote:


>Warning:  Long, boring botanical lecture to follow.


[snip, snip]



>And that's the end of today's lecture.  So, one make it thru all this???
>Hahaha.
>
>Linda



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

From: "marilynn smih" <marilynnsmih#hotmail.com>
Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2002 13:30:39 -0700
Subject: [Baren 19398] Re: Baren Digest V21 #1979 

This is for G Jarvis.  I tried sending through your server and I got the 
message that the lines were to busy???  so am doing this through Baren.  I 
recieved your check for postage.  Your return 14a package will come back to 
you as well as the postage allows, thanks.
Marilynn




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

From: Louise Cass <lcass#primus.ca>
Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2002 17:37:41 -0400
Subject: [Baren 19399] Re: Baren Digest V20 #1977 

Sharri -

You're dead right! I just used some old speedball for proofing and it's
horrible -
I'm very pleased with Graph Chem (am using the water based and am actually
able to hand colour without ink bleeding when dry) - haven't tried any other 
makes yet as I haven't seen anything else available here - maybe I didn't 
looked enough tho' Does anyone out there know what else is available in
Canada-
specifically Toronto??
Louise C.

At 09:36 AM 10/1/02 -0700, you wrote:

>I can't stand it! I have to implore those who are still printing with 
>Speedball inks to give it up, please. It breaks my heart to see a 
>beautiful image,  wonderfully cut and the printing is less than it could 
>be.  What could be an outstanding print is, instead, at best mediocre. 
>It is so disheartening. Please? Just try other inks and see if you 
>aren't happier with the result.  There, that feels better. Thank you for 
>letting me get that off my chest. Now, I will try and keep that issue 
>out of view :-)
>Sharri
>
>
>

http://www.LCassArt.com

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

From: Louise Cass <lcass#primus.ca>
Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2002 18:12:44 -0400
Subject: [Baren 19400] Re: Baren Digest V20 #1977 

I'm sending another quick reply - I feel rather stupid referring to results
of proofing
with Speedball ink as being 'horrible' - I shall never reply on an impulse
again!

My main beef with Speedball is that I seem to have to roll out a lot more
(on the slab of glass I use) than when I use Graph Chem - both oil and
water base
inks - also the Speedball dries more quickly and I remember having to use
the retarder
We all know it isn't really 'ink-snobbery' but very personal preferences or
habits.
Louise Cass

At 09:36 AM 10/1/02 -0700, you wrote:

>I can't stand it! I have to implore those who are still printing with 
>Speedball inks to give it up, please. It breaks my heart to see a 
>beautiful image,  wonderfully cut and the printing is less than it could 
>be.  What could be an outstanding print is, instead, at best mediocre. 
>It is so disheartening. Please? Just try other inks and see if you 
>aren't happier with the result.  There, that feels better. Thank you for 
>letting me get that off my chest. Now, I will try and keep that issue 
>out of view :-)
>Sharri
>
>
>

http://www.LCassArt.com

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

End of Baren Digest V21 #1980
*****************************