Today's postings
- [Baren 30596] Re: Baren Digest (old) V35 #3434 ("Robert Viana")
- [Baren 30597] Re: Baren Digest (old) V35 #3434 (L Cass)
- [Baren 30598] Re: Baren Digest (old) V35 #3434 (Charles Morgan)
- [Baren 30599] Exchange #29 update -- WOW (Mike Lyon)
- [Baren 30600] Re: Baren Digest (old) V35 #3436 Hanga pigments (Nancy Osadchuk)
- [Baren 30601] Re: Baren Digest (old) V35 #3436 Hanga pigments (Pauldejode # aol.com)
- [Baren 30602] Baren Member blogs: Update Notification (Blog Manager)
Message 1
From: "Robert Viana"
Date: Sat, 08 Apr 2006 12:17:33 -0200
Subject: [Baren 30596] Re: Baren Digest (old) V35 #3434
Send Message: To this poster
120
Message 2
From: L Cass
Date: Fri, 07 Apr 2006 11:28:26 -0400
Subject: [Baren 30597] Re: Baren Digest (old) V35 #3434
Send Message: To this poster
Marilynn - 250 gm would correspond to 90lb
Louise
Message 3
From: Charles Morgan
Date: Sat, 08 Apr 2006 08:07:16 -0700
Subject: [Baren 30598] Re: Baren Digest (old) V35 #3434
Send Message: To this poster
>If a paper is 250 grams os that 90lb or 120lb???? Please answer.
>Marilynn
Weight specified in pounds (lbs) is rather ambiguous. The weight in pounds
may mean "pounds per 1000 sq. ft." or it may be "pounds per ream of 500
sheets". Obviously, "pounds per ream" will depend on the size of each
sheet. And that is where the problem comes in. Paper can be sold as letter
size, cover size, text size, etc. In each case, a measurement given as
"lbs" may mean something very different because the base size of the paper
is different. I have reproduced a table below.
Weight given in "grams" generally means "grams per square meter" or "gsm"
and is a constant measurement which does not vary with the size of the sheets.
Cheers ...... Charles
From: http://painting.about.com/od/artglossaryw/g/defweightpaper.htm
The thickness of a sheet of paper is indicated by its weight, measured
either in grams per square meter (gsm) or pounds per ream (lb). The
standard weights of machine-made paper are 190 gsm (90 lb), 300 gsm (140
lb), 356 gsm (260 lb), and 638 gsm (300 lb). It's generally recommended
that paper less than 356 gsm is
stretched
before use to prevent it buckling or warping.
This
from: http://www.designtalkboard.com/designtalk/index.php/topic,1147.0.html
In a nutshell, the U.S. system is more difficult to understand because the
same number in #'s (pounds, or lbs) can be used for thicker card stock or
thinner text papers. Whereas the metric system is standard across all
weights of papers. For example, a card stock may be a 80# Cover or 80#
Text. But in the Metric system, the same papers would simply be 216 g/m²
and 104 g/m², respectively (the first being twice as thick as the second).
So when paper weight is specified in the US. you also have to specify its
dimensions/set size (as the same 'weight' can be applied to different size
paper). In places using the metric system, a paper weight is specified only
by its 'gsm', regardless of size. The difference arises because the metric
system also specify the AREA of paper the weight refers to i.e. grams per
square metre, whereas the US system refers to just the weight (in pounds)
so you also have to add the size. Trouble is, the US system makes it
difficult to compare papers directly, and you also have to know the paper
size that each term refers to (e.g. bond, offset, cover, tag, index).
This table from: http://www.qslfactory.com/mix_n_match/inkjetqsls.html
BOND TEXT GSM
(lbs) (lbs)
size 17x22 in 25x38 in
20 50 75
24 60 90
28 70 105
32 80 120
35 90 131
43 110 160
50 130 210
[]
>Marilynn
Weight specified in pounds (lbs) is rather ambiguous. The weight in pounds
may mean "pounds per 1000 sq. ft." or it may be "pounds per ream of 500
sheets". Obviously, "pounds per ream" will depend on the size of each
sheet. And that is where the problem comes in. Paper can be sold as letter
size, cover size, text size, etc. In each case, a measurement given as
"lbs" may mean something very different because the base size of the paper
is different. I have reproduced a table below.
Weight given in "grams" generally means "grams per square meter" or "gsm"
and is a constant measurement which does not vary with the size of the sheets.
Cheers ...... Charles
From: http://painting.about.com/od/artglossaryw/g/defweightpaper.htm
The thickness of a sheet of paper is indicated by its weight, measured
either in grams per square meter (gsm) or pounds per ream (lb). The
standard weights of machine-made paper are 190 gsm (90 lb), 300 gsm (140
lb), 356 gsm (260 lb), and 638 gsm (300 lb). It's generally recommended
that paper less than 356 gsm is
stretched
before use to prevent it buckling or warping.
This
from: http://www.designtalkboard.com/designtalk/index.php/topic,1147.0.html
In a nutshell, the U.S. system is more difficult to understand because the
same number in #'s (pounds, or lbs) can be used for thicker card stock or
thinner text papers. Whereas the metric system is standard across all
weights of papers. For example, a card stock may be a 80# Cover or 80#
Text. But in the Metric system, the same papers would simply be 216 g/m²
and 104 g/m², respectively (the first being twice as thick as the second).
So when paper weight is specified in the US. you also have to specify its
dimensions/set size (as the same 'weight' can be applied to different size
paper). In places using the metric system, a paper weight is specified only
by its 'gsm', regardless of size. The difference arises because the metric
system also specify the AREA of paper the weight refers to i.e. grams per
square metre, whereas the US system refers to just the weight (in pounds)
so you also have to add the size. Trouble is, the US system makes it
difficult to compare papers directly, and you also have to know the paper
size that each term refers to (e.g. bond, offset, cover, tag, index).
This table from: http://www.qslfactory.com/mix_n_match/inkjetqsls.html
BOND TEXT GSM
(lbs) (lbs)
size 17x22 in 25x38 in
20 50 75
24 60 90
28 70 105
32 80 120
35 90 131
43 110 160
50 130 210
[]
Message 4
From: Mike Lyon
Date: Sat, 08 Apr 2006 10:39:02 -0500
Subject: [Baren 30599] Exchange #29 update -- WOW
Send Message: To this poster
OH, BABY! Exchange #29 (The Nude) has proven to
be by far our most popular (and populous)
exchange to date -- BOTH the regular AND the
Salon exchanges now have 30 printers signed up
and there are already three on the waiting list
for the salon! This is going to be pretty spectacular, I imagine -- WOW!
Sign-up at
http://barenforum.org/exchange/exchange_sign-up.html
will remain 'open' through the end of this month
(April). I anticipate that we may lose several
participants between now and the July 1
no-drop-out deadline -- likely seven or eight
based on recent experience, so it's likely that
if you sign up now you'll be included in 29a (the
Salon de Refusé) -- please don't hesitate to add
your name to our (growing) list!
Those already 'in' the regular exchange are
allowed to sign-up and participate in the salon
as well as the regular exchange if they
wish. Now that the one-week holding period is
over, all new sign-ups will be appended to the
waiting list in the order received.
It's going to be a little bit complicated to
coordinate the two exchanges because it is likely
that some participants in the regular exchange
will eventually drop out. When/if that happens,
the first-listed salon member will be promoted
into the regular exchange and the first on the
waiting list will be promoted into the salon. So
It will not be clear WHICH exchange the
top-listed salon members will ultimately be 'in'
until AFTER July 1 -- PLEASE do not send prints
to the salon coordinator until the lists have
been finalized around mid-July (regular
participants may send prints whenever they are ready, of course)!
Hope this is all clear as mud :)
Best, good luck, and thanks,
Mike
Mike Lyon
Kansas City, Missouri
http://mlyon.com
be by far our most popular (and populous)
exchange to date -- BOTH the regular AND the
Salon exchanges now have 30 printers signed up
and there are already three on the waiting list
for the salon! This is going to be pretty spectacular, I imagine -- WOW!
Sign-up at
http://barenforum.org/exchange/exchange_sign-up.html
will remain 'open' through the end of this month
(April). I anticipate that we may lose several
participants between now and the July 1
no-drop-out deadline -- likely seven or eight
based on recent experience, so it's likely that
if you sign up now you'll be included in 29a (the
Salon de Refusé) -- please don't hesitate to add
your name to our (growing) list!
Those already 'in' the regular exchange are
allowed to sign-up and participate in the salon
as well as the regular exchange if they
wish. Now that the one-week holding period is
over, all new sign-ups will be appended to the
waiting list in the order received.
It's going to be a little bit complicated to
coordinate the two exchanges because it is likely
that some participants in the regular exchange
will eventually drop out. When/if that happens,
the first-listed salon member will be promoted
into the regular exchange and the first on the
waiting list will be promoted into the salon. So
It will not be clear WHICH exchange the
top-listed salon members will ultimately be 'in'
until AFTER July 1 -- PLEASE do not send prints
to the salon coordinator until the lists have
been finalized around mid-July (regular
participants may send prints whenever they are ready, of course)!
Hope this is all clear as mud :)
Best, good luck, and thanks,
Mike
Mike Lyon
Kansas City, Missouri
http://mlyon.com
Message 5
From: Nancy Osadchuk
Date: Sat, 08 Apr 2006 10:03:15 -0600
Subject: [Baren 30600] Re: Baren Digest (old) V35 #3436 Hanga pigments
Send Message: To this poster
"pastels may contain too much chalk". Good quality pastels should not
contain any chalk, which is impregnated with dye, not necessarily permanent.
Good quality pastels are made with calcium carbonate, gum tragacanth and the
same permanent pigments used in oils, acrylics, and watercolors. I have
used them only when I didn't quite have the right color otherwise. IMHO
plain old tube or pan watercolors work really well, but having the powdered
pigment on hand to mix up it still probably the easiest and best way for
hang.
Nancy O
contain any chalk, which is impregnated with dye, not necessarily permanent.
Good quality pastels are made with calcium carbonate, gum tragacanth and the
same permanent pigments used in oils, acrylics, and watercolors. I have
used them only when I didn't quite have the right color otherwise. IMHO
plain old tube or pan watercolors work really well, but having the powdered
pigment on hand to mix up it still probably the easiest and best way for
hang.
Nancy O
Message 6
From: Pauldejode # aol.com
Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2006 16:52:48 EDT
Subject: [Baren 30601] Re: Baren Digest (old) V35 #3436 Hanga pigments
Send Message: To this poster
calcium carbonate IS one of the forms of "chalk",
Paul de Jode
Paul de Jode
Message 7
From: Blog Manager
Date: 9 Apr 2006 03:55:05 -0000
Subject: [Baren 30602] Baren Member blogs: Update Notification
Send Message: To this poster
This is an automatic update message being sent to [Baren] by the forum blog software.
The following new entries were found on the listed printmaker's websites during the past 24 hours. (17 sites checked, just before midnight Eastern time)
*****************
Site Name: David Bull, Woodblock Printmaker
Item: Small Print Collection - 2nd print uploaded
http://woodblock.com/collection/prints/print_02.html
*****************
Site Name: on this block
Author: Michael Fraley
Item:
http://onthisblock.blogspot.com/2006/04/random-thoughts-on-being-neither-fish.html
*****************
[Baren] members: if you have a printmaking blog (or a website with a published ATOM feed), and wish it to be included in this daily checklist, please write to the Baren Blog Manager at:
http://barenforum.org/contact_baren.php
The following new entries were found on the listed printmaker's websites during the past 24 hours. (17 sites checked, just before midnight Eastern time)
*****************
Site Name: David Bull, Woodblock Printmaker
Item: Small Print Collection - 2nd print uploaded
http://woodblock.com/collection/prints/print_02.html
*****************
Site Name: on this block
Author: Michael Fraley
Item:
http://onthisblock.blogspot.com/2006/04/random-thoughts-on-being-neither-fish.html
*****************
[Baren] members: if you have a printmaking blog (or a website with a published ATOM feed), and wish it to be included in this daily checklist, please write to the Baren Blog Manager at:
http://barenforum.org/contact_baren.php