GUM PRINTING A Step-by-Step Manual, Highlighting Artists and Their Creative Practice

Gum Printing: A Step-by-Step Manual, Highlighting Artists and Their Creative Practice is a two-part book on written by the medium’s leading expert, Christina Z. Anderson. Section One provides a step-by-step description of the gum printing process. From setting up the “dimroom” (no required!) to evaluating finished prints, it walks the reader through everything that is needed to establish a firm gum practice with the simplest of setups at home. Section Two showcases contemporary artists’ works, illustrating the myriad ways gum is conceptualized and practiced today. The works in these pages range from monochrome to colorful and from subtle to bold, representing a variety of genres, including still lifes, portraits, nudes, landscapes, urbanscapes and more. Featuring over 80 artists and 400 full- images, Gum Printing is the most complete overview of this dynamic and expressive medium that has yet appeared in print.

Key topics covered include:

• The history of gum • Simple digital negatives for gum, platinum, and • Preparing supplies • Making monochrome, duotone, tricolor, and quadcolor gum prints • Printing gum over cyanotype • Printing gum over platinum • Troubleshooting gum • Advice on developing a creative practice

Christina Z. Anderson’s work focuses on the cultural and spiritual landscape expressed in 19th century photographic techniques, primarily gum and casein bichromate. Her work has shown nationally and internationally in over 100 shows and 40 publications. She has authored several books, two of which—The Experimental Workbook and Gum Printing and Other Amazing Contact Printing Processes—have sold worldwide in 40 countries. She is co-author with Samuel Wang, S. Carl King, and Zhong Jianming of Handcrafted: The Art and Practice of the Handmade Print, now in its third printing. Anderson is Associate Professor of Photography at Montana State University, Bozeman. To see her work, visit christinaZanderson.com. This page intentionally left blank GUM PRINTING A Step-by-Step Manual, Highlighting Artists and Their Creative Practice

Christina Z. Anderson First published 2017 by Routledge 711 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10017 and by Routledge 2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN

Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business

© 2017 Taylor & Francis

The right of Christina Z. Anderson to be identified as author of this work has been asserted by her in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilized in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers.

Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe.

Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Names: Anderson, Christina Z. Title: Gum printing : A Step-by-Step Manual Highlighting Artists and Their Creative Practice / Christina Z. Anderson. Description: New York : Routledge, 2016. | Includes bibliographical references and index. Identifiers: LCCN 2016002690 (print) | LCCN 2016007641 (ebook) | ISBN 9781138667372 (hardback) | ISBN 9781138101500 (pbk.) | ISBN 9781315656892 (eBook) Subjects: LCSH: Photography­—Printing processes—Gum bichromate. | Photographers. | Photography, Artistic. Classification: LCC TR445 .A53 2016 (print) | LCC TR445 (ebook) | DDC 773/.5--dc23 LC record available at http://lccn.loc.gov/2016002690

ISBN: 978-1-138-66737-2 (hbk) ISBN: 978-1-138-10150-0 (pbk) ISBN: 978-1-315-65689-2 (ebk)

Publisher’s Note: This book has been prepared from -ready copy provided by the author. Also by Christina Z. Anderson: The Experimental Photography Workbook (2012) Gum Printing and Other Amazing Contact Printing Processes (2013) Handcrafted: The Art and Practice of the Handmade Print (2014, 2015, 2016, Chinese, Jianming, King, Wang) Notice to readers: Exercise caution in the handling of all photographic chemicals. Use of any such chemicals constitutes some risk, and some are poisonous. The publisher and author accept no responsibility for injury or loss arising from the procedures or materials described in this book whether used properly or improperly. The workplace should be well ventilated. Chemicals should be mixed only in the manner described. Avoid contact between the chemicals and eyes, skin, clothing, and furniture. Do not eat or drink while using chemicals. Keep them away from pets and children. Wear protective eye wear and gloves if necessary. In short, be mindful of all safety procedures for yourself and others. Dedicated to Alphonse-Louis Poitevin, gum’s inventor, and John Pouncy, gum’s practitioner Figure 0.1. Bamboo & Ferns, from the series Tropical, tricolor gum bichromate © L. Huhn 2015. Huhn, a long- time photographer, was introduced to alternative processes later in his career. His painterly technique is a good meld with the lush tropical subject matter. Table of Contents

Figures 0.2–0.3. Left: Banana Leaf; right: Hawaiian Ferns, tricolor gum bichromate © L. Huhn 2015.

Preface xi Solid measurements 28 Chapter 1 Liquid measurements 28 The History of Gum Printing 1 Sources 28 Crash course in gum history 1 Robert Mosher’s light box plans 29 Tools required 29 Section One Gum Printing Step-by-Step 21 Materials list 29 Lightbox assembly instructions 30 Chapter 2 Chapter 3 Setting Up the Gum Dimroom 23 Digital Negatives for Gum 33 First, a word about safety 23 Contact printing processes 33 Essential big equipment 24 Curve preparation 33 Essential supplies 24 Image preparation 35 Optional supplies 25 Troubleshooting the 36 Chemistry supplies 25 Monochrome negative 36 Papers 27 Duotone (two) negatives 37 Other papers 27 Tricolor (three) negatives 37 Units of measurement 28 Quadcolor (four) negatives 38 viii

Printer settings 38 Printing gum on dark paper 70 Determining time 39 Chapter 6 Chapter 4 Printing Gum Over Cyanotype 73 Preparing Supplies 43 A word about paper 74 Paper 43 Cyanotype formula 74 Paper surface 43 Making the cyanotype-gum print 75 Paper color 43 Troubleshooting cyanotype 76 Paper brand 43 Chapter 7 Cutting 44 Printing Gum Over Platinum 81 Shrinking 44 Supplies needed 82 Sizing 45 A word about paper 82 Classic gelatin sizing 45 A word about brushes 82 Gelatin sizing formula 46 Potassium oxalate developer formula 82 Gum preparation 47 Clear formulas 82 Mixing gum from powder 47 Coating formula 83 Mixing gum from lumps 47 Making the platinum print 84 Preserving gum 47 Using a single negative 85 Dichromate preparation 48 Using duotone negatives 86 10% ammonium dichromate 49 Using RGB negatives 86 12% 49 Using CMYK negatives 86 Pigment preparation 49 Troubleshooting platinum 87 Choosing the best pigments 49 Chapter 8 My favorite pigments 50 Troubleshooting Gum 89 My next three favorites 50 The big four 89 Other useful 52 More complex answers 90 Mixing the pigments 54 Layer washes all off 90 Stock pigment mixes 55 Layer does not wash off 91 Diluting stock pigment mixes 55 Layer flakes off 92 The math behind this 55 Highlights are stained 93 Working strength pigments 56 Shadows are stained brown 94 Combining pigments 57 The print is grainy 95 Tricolor combinations 57 The print has contrast issues 96 Chapter 5 The print is too dark 97 Making the Gum Print 59 The print is too light 98 Registering gum 59 Fisheyes 98 Coating gum 60 The coating is streaky 98 Exposing gum 61 There is uneven exposure 99 Developing gum 61 There’s a dark spot 99 Clearing gum 63 There’s a white speck or spot 99 “Pot metabi” clear 64 Registration is impossible 100 Printing monochrome gum 64 The paper curls terribly 100 Printing through the paper back 64 Printing speed has changed 100 One-coat monochrome 65 Layer keeps bleeding 100 Multiple-coat monochrome 66 Chapter 9 Printing duotone gum 67 Developing a Creative Practice 103 Printing tricolor gum 68 Fears about creative practice 103 Printing quadcolor gum 68 Personal fears 104 Layer order in gum 68 Fears about one’s work 104 Printing pseudo-color gum 68 Fears about one’s career 104 Printing watercolor gum 69 Fears summary 105 Printing “autochrome” gum 69 Reality of creative practice 105 ix

Steps to a creative practice 107 Peter Liepke 203 Time management 110 Joli Livaudais 209 Why creative practice? 111 Carmen Lizardo 215 Section Two Chia N-Löfqvist 217 Artists and Their Creative Practice 115 Erin Mahoney 221 Janet Matthews 225 Chapter 10 Contemporary Artists 117 Marek Matusz 229 Scott McMahon 233 Servane Aubineau 119 Dave Molnar 235 Kayla Bedey 121 Hillevi Nagel 239 Karin Berglund 125 Rainer Ortlieb 243 Diana Bloomfield 127 Amy Parrish 245 Hans de Bruijn 133 Josh Raftery 249 Guido Ceuppens 137 Ron Reeder 251 Alex Chater 141 Ernestine Ruben 255 Sandra Davis 145 Tomas Sobota 259 Mary Donato 149 Dennis Spector 261 Anne Eder 153 Brian Taylor 265 Monica Englund 157 Lada Tazetdinova 271 Dan Estabrook 159 Sarah Van Keuren 275 Jesseca Ferguson 163 Melanie Walker 281 Keith Gerling 167 Sam Wang 285 Tony Gonzalez 171 Marydorsey Wanless 289 Remko de Graaff 177 Ellie Young 293 Brenton Hamilton 179 Christine Zuercher 294 David Hatton 181 Bibliography 295 Dan Herrera 183 Gum monographs 295 Jodie Hooker 187 Recommended books 295 Suzanne Izzo 191 Books with gum chapters 296 Ira Khorunzhaya 195 Journals 297 Sookang Kim 197 British Journal of Photography 299 Kerik Kouklis 199 Index 302 Figure 0.4. Through the Glass Darkly, multiple layered tricolor gum bichromate © Christina Z. Anderson 2015 Preface

Figures 0.5–0.6. High School Sweetheart, © Christina Z. Anderson 2015. The image on the left is a gum print created true to the original retro snapshot. The image on the right is made using the exact same negatives, but creative brushwork was used dur- ing development to make a more painterly image to signify the passage of time. Gum is infinitely flexible from photographic to painterly.

y gum story began in 1998 when I learned Shortly after this publication, when I thought I the process from Rudi Dietrich in an would be done writing forever, I began working on Malternative processes class at Montana a co-authored book for the Chinese audience that State University. I knew immediately it would be was more artist and less how-to. This experience, my process of choice because it dovetailed with my and the urging of others such as Dennis Spector painting background. I found gum printing to be a (see Chapter 10 Contemporary Artists), made it unique blend between the two disciplines. apparent that a different kind of gum book was In 2003 I began a decade of historical research needed that would complement my lengthy one. into the gum process and that research resulted in First, it should be a single-process book, about gum my 2013 book Gum Printing and Other Amazing printing only. Second, it needed to be simple, less Contact Printing Processes. The book is divided “academic.” Most beginning gummists just want a into two parts: the first half is devoted to gum step-by-step how-to to begin their gum journeys. and casein bichromate; the second half includes a Third, it needed to show off contemporary gum number of the most popular alternative processes printers and their works as well as how they have such as platinum, kallitype, cyanotype, salt, and modified the gum process to suit their practice. van dyke brown. There are so many different ways to practice gum! xii

Figures 0.7–0.9. It’s Complicated, three tricolor gum bichromate prints © Christina Z. Anderson 2015. I was impressed with this lone iris still sharing its beauty while growing all tangled in a fence. From left to right are a true color palette, a retro color pal- ette, and then a print brushed vigorously with a Connoisseur scrubber brush. I thought I’d help the plant along by removing all its growth hindrances...

Spector described a need for “insight into how Book writing is a big commitment, made possible photographers work, what they think, a more by my patient husband Tom Anderson who has personal approach. More philosophy than cook been through this now five times with me. I write, book.” And thus this book was born and Focal teach, and cook. He does all the rest, and I mean Press/Routledge has allowed it to happen. all—grocery shopping, housecleaning, accounting, It wasn’t until the last artist’s works and words property management, toilets—while I write, hour were placed into the text that I realized the vision after hour, day after day. During this time he and had been realized. The sum of the parts—the my children Alicia, Thomas, Elle, Noelle, and Mary step-by-step part and the artist pages—created a plus spouses and grandkids have had to occupy a whole better than I had anticipated. The book has lower place on my priority list and I thank them given artists their voices, with their very individual for understanding. methods validated by the success of their works. My three alt pro buddies Sam Wang, Sandy At the same time, there are certain commonalities King, and Mark Nelson have been with me for a or threads running through all artist discussions decade. I learn, chat, commiserate, , and (edited only very lightly) which give a sense of grow old with these three friends. gum’s unique identity. We are all so very different The book couldn’t have come to fruition without and yet we are united by the passionate love of this the help of Carolyn Jenkins who has edited now odd, beautiful, and sometimes frustrating process. three of my books over the years; Meta Newhouse There are few alternative processes today that whom I consulted about graphic design; Kimberly can print in color. There are no alternative processes Duncan-Mooney at Focal Press/Routledge who that have the flexibility and range of expression initiated the conversation about the possibility of as does gum printing. It can replicate a full color this book in the first place; Galen Glaze, a patient, image perfectly, or be the most removed from the kind, always available, and thorough editorial photographic image possible. Gum is not complex. assistant; and Nicola Platt my final Production Gum does take time and commitment to learn to Editor. Writing may be a solitary task; production do well. However, once the beginning gum printer is not. has committed to the process, I am confident — Christina Z. Anderson 2016 that she will agree with me that gum is the most christinaZanderson.com intriguing process of all. The artists’ comments regarding “why gum” will attest to this fact. Figure 0.10. Untitled (self-portrait), tricolor gum bichromate over cyanotype © Gintare Karpaviciute 2014. Gintare Karpaviciute was born in Lithuania. She received a BA in Photography for Digital Media at the University of Bradford, UK, during which time she came to Montana State University as an exchange student and took my alternative processes class. Gee quickly became a excellent gum printer. Figures 1.1–1.3. Jardin d’Agronomie Tropical, duo- tone gum bichromate with handmade pigments © John Brewer 2015. “These images are taken with an iPhone in Jardin d’Agronomie Tropical near Paris, a dilapidated collection of buildings from France’s dark past. This small park hosted the 1907 Paris Colonial Exposition. The exhibition was based around several villages representing the French empire (Indochine, Madagascar, Congo, Sudan, Tunisia, Morocco). Inhabitants from these territories were also brought over to live in these villages and be observed by curious visitors for the duration of the exhibition, a sort of human zoo. With this body of work I have used two pigments I have made from materials found in France, charcoal from burnt trees and a brown/ochre from Roussillon.” John Brewer (Manchester, UK) first became interested in photography in the 1970s and is both self taught and formally educated. Brewer’s work has been published, exhibited, and resides in private collections internationally. His primary interest is historic photographic processes. Brewer teaches regularly in the UK and the South of France. To see more of his work, visit thevictorianphotographer.com or johnbrewerphotography.com. Chapter 1 The History of Gum Printing

Figure 1.4. Great Catch, © Christina Z. Anderson. From left to right: original slide image; the image exposed in plain gum arabic just after exposure and before development; the image after development that has cleared to a pale, sage green; the image left out in sunlight for a couple hours with a circular glass on top. Sunlight fades the dichromate green color to an even paler, almost imperceptible gray-green. By contrast, where the glass has prevented the sunlight from hitting the print, the yellow circle remaining needs more time to fade, which it will with time and in regular room light. This illustrates the necessity of adding pigment to the gum layer, something that wasn’t suggested until 16 years after the discovery of dichromate sensitivity! Other- wise there will hardly be an image left after a few days.

um printing is a 19th century photographic various earth tones such as black, brown, ochre, and process wherein a mixture of gum sienna to create monochromatic or duotone images. Garabic, photo-sensitive dichromate, and Today, gum is infinitely more colorful. watercolor pigment is brushed on paper, dried, Gum is 100% archival, the most of any and exposed to light under a large negative. The photographic process. A darkroom is not necessary: light-sensitive dichromate hardens the gum arabic the entire process can be carried out in regular proportionately to the amount of light received. room light, what we nowadays call a “dimroom.” With a simple water development, the unhardened It is cheap; after the initial expense of setting up parts of the gum layer wash away and voilà— a a dimroom, a gum print doesn’t cost much more positive image of the negative is revealed. than the paper it is printed on. It is the most Gum arabic is only one of a number of colloids painterly photographic process there is, and can be that dichromates will harden—for example, egg as far removed from, or as close to, a photograph whites, gelatin, or casein­—hence the name gum as desired. It produces one-of-a-kind prints. And printing or gum bichromate. The correct scientific it is for those of us who appreciate the journey as term is actually gum dichromate but for some much as the destination, the process as much as reason the bichromate term continues to be used the end product. in an endearing and historical, albeit incorrect, way. The watercolor pigment is added to the layer Crash course in gum history to make the hardened layer colored and visible. If There is a certain pleasure in realizing one’s watercolor were not added, the hardened gum layer connectedness to the very beginning of photography would start out as a brownish-yellow image that, when doing the gum process. A brief timeline over time, fades to a barely imperceptible green. follows, highlighting some of gum’s key players. For When gum printing first started, practitioners used a more detailed time line, see Gum Printing and Other Amazing Contact Printing Processes. 2 Gum Printing

Figure 1.5. Boat, Scottish Loch, monochrome gum bichromate © Johnny Brian 2014. Brian’s photograph is poignant for several reasons. One, it is photographed in Scotland, birthplace of Mungo Ponton who made the first dichromate in 1839. Two, it is a monochrome gum similar to those that would have been created at gum’s dawning, although Brian printed his monochrome gum in multiple layers, a technique that wasn’t discovered until decades later. Three, it references a very famous image by Peter Henry Emerson, Gathering Water Lilies (1886), but Brian’s boat is empty of people and his somewhat- Pictorialist-romantic aesthetic has a contemporary melancholy which is so prevalent today.

In 1798 French chemist Louis Nicolas Vauquelin In 1840 Edmund Becquerel discovered it was discovered the light sensitivity of chromium and the sizing of the paper that had an effect on chromic acid. 1 dichromate’s sensitivity to light, which was the beginning of the discovery that dichromates harden In 1832 Gustav Suckow discovered potassium 4 colloids. Even though two sources say Becquerel bichromate in contact with organic matter is 2 found that dichromates harden organics, too, Fox reduced by light and takes on a green color. Talbot gets credit for it. Ponton did not discover In 1839 Scotsman Mungo Ponton made the first that dichromates hardened colloids. 5 dichromate photograms by placing objects on top In 1852 William Henry Fox Talbot discovered of dichromated paper and exposing the paper to dichromate would harden gelatin and he took out light. He was pretty excited because it resulted in a 6 a patent in “photoglyphy” in 1853. yellow to orange to brown image, but as my visual Great Catch shows, this dichromate “stain” will fade In 1855 August 27 French patent no. 24,592 and to a pale green with time. 3 December 13 English patent No. 2815, Alphonse- Louis Poitevin (1819-1882) adds pigment to the colloid and dichromate, and forever becomes the historical father of gum. 7 Chapter 1 The History of Gum Printing 3

In 1858 April 10 John Pouncy filed patent Commercial carbon papers such as produced by the no. 780 in England entitled “Improvements Autotype company came on the market and gum in the Production of Photographic Pictures,” a couldn’t compete. pigmented gum process. 8 Unfortunately Poitevin’s In 1890 an interesting set of articles on patent of 1855 already specified colloids of Impressionism appeared in the British Journal of which gum is one (though there is no evidence 16 Photography (BJP) during the next several years. that Poitevin used gum). Pouncy withdrew 9 Photographic change was in the air. his patent and Poitevin remains the father of gum and France the country of gum’s origin. In 1891–2 George Davison, Maskell, and others The concept of ultiplem layer printing would seceded from the Photographic Society of not be discovered for almost 40 years. Gum was Great Britain to form the Linked Ring. 17 The done with one thick highly pigmented layer, with Pictorialists, the Impressionists, the Linked probably bullet-proof film negatives, and out Ring, the Secessionists, all were instrumental in in the sunlight. Thus success with a short-scale, promoting a new form of art photography that contrasty process such as gum (called carbon moved away from the sharp and shiny school to printing at this time) was difficult, compounded a more painterly and soft-focus standard. Gum with such a thick layer, and the resulting prints would be reborn. In Wilhelm Koesters’ gum book of were flaky and grainy with no halftones (what 1904, he credits the art in photography movement we term midtones today). Prints were described for gum’s resurgence, 18 saying this new direction as soot and chalk. Human nature is to blame was “the natural reaction to the soulless photography the process and not the practice and that’s what of the past years.” 19 happened. The myth that gum could not do On March 27, 1894 Pouncy dies at the age of halftones was heard far and wide, even though it is 20 75, the same year that Frederic and Victoire recorded in the journals that Pouncy had produced 10 Artigue began marketing a commercial gum paper results hardly distinguishable from silver prints. called Charbon Velours, the first of its kind, whose Some people even accused Pouncy of producing 21 11,12 composition was a secret. This paper finally prints by means which he had not disclosed. proved that direct carbon aka gum printing could That same year it was announced that ouncyP produce halftones. This helped to renew the sudden along with Poitevin and others won the Duc de 22 interest in all things gum. Other commercial Luynes prize for a process that improved image papers came on the market, too. Rouillé-Ladevèze permanence. Poitevin got the gold medal (600 used the Artigue paper, and then wrote the first francs) for priority of invention of the carbon gum book Sepia Photo et Sanguine Photo that same process, and Pouncy—who was the first to supply 23 year. Gum became de rigueur. And, in that same the French Commission with pure carbon prints— 13 year, Robert Demachy (1859–1936) discovered the silver (400 francs). 24 gum. Little did Demachy know at that time that 1864 Joseph Wilson Swan introduced carbon his work would be forever attached to the gum transfer in which a layer of pigmented gelatin was process and that he would become the gum guru transferred to another support in development. of the 1890s and beyond. Halftones were beautifully rendered in this During 1894–1898 gum spread to Austria process and gum was put on the back burner for 14 and Germany. Dr. Hugo Henneberg had seen 3 decades. Poor gum; it came at a time when 15 Demachy’s prints and introduced the process to sharpness and detail were of utmost importance. 25 Heinrich Kühn and Herr Watzek. These three Swan’s new process was both archival and detailed. men invented multiple gum and tricolor gum within 4 Gum Printing

Figure 1.6. Nude #1, quadcolor gum bichromate © Laurie Beck-Peterson 2009. This subtle not-quite-monochrome print is made from cmyk separations printed in lamp black. ivory black, sepia and davies grey. To see more of Beck-Peterson’s work visit beck-photos.com.

the first two years of their gum practice. [Note: Luis transfer—would be a misnomer because carbon Nadeau says that the idea of multiple printing black pigment is not always employed.” 27 It was was already covered in Poitevin’s patent so he has said that year that “…an epidemic of bichromated gum priority of invention and if one reads the patent, the is as strange as it must have been unforeseen” with ⅓ of idea of multiple layers or colors is in there. 26 The the in the Photographic Salon being invention of multiple and tricolor printing by the gum prints. Well-known photographers reveled in Viennese is historically unquestionably attributed the process­—Demachy, Watzek, Henneberg, Puyo, to these men.] The invention of multiple gum Bremard, Moss, Mummery, Henneberg and Kuhn meant shadows, midtones, and highlights could be who had already begun doing multiple printing done separately in different printings and achieve and multiple color gum. 28 It became popular in a tonal range as long as desired. Gum had arrived. America as well. 29 In 1897 Demachy and Alfred Maskell published In 1898 W. J. Warren’s A Handbook to the Gum their gum book Photo-Aquatint. However, the name Bichromate Process for Obtaining a Permanent Print already referred to an intaglio printmaking process! in pigment by Photographic Means without Transfer They withdrew the name very quickly, but how was published in England, and there was a flurry ironic that gum didn’t even have its own name after of gum books in France, England, and Germany 40 years! Maskell did correctly point out that gum’s as well. Since that time, there has never been such former name “carbon”—now usurped by carbon a confluence of gum monographs. Chapter 1 The History of Gum Printing 5

Figure 1.7. The Tree, gum over platinum © Giorgio Bordin 2014. Three layers of burnt sienna gum over platinum, Bergger Cot 320 paper developed with potassium oxalate developer, sized with formalin-hardened gelatin. Gum over platinum, discov- ered in 1902 by Silberer, was very popular in America at the turn of the 20th century and continues to be popular today. The gum strengthens the darks of the platinum and makes an essentially matte process juicy and glossy. Here Bordin shows the transition, left to right, from straight platinum through the three layers.

In 1902 M. Herbert Silberer was the first to From 1910 on Paul Anderson (1880–1956) was exhibit gum/platinum prints at the Camera Club, the most long-term proponent of the gum process, Vienna. 30 Silberer invented it and shared his keeping it alive throughout the first half of the process in the Allgemeine Sport-Zeitung January 5 20th century. He wrote extensively in journals, 1902 issue. 31 authored quite a few books, and taught for two years at Clarence White’s school. 37 Anderson’s gum In 1904 probably the most influential book on articles can be found in multiple issues of American current practice Der Gummidruck by Wilhelm 38 Photography from 1910– 1935. Koesters was published. This book was discussed by all the photographic journals of its day because In 1914 Demachy quits all photography at the of its scientific approach. outbreak of World War I. 39 With the advent of and sharp detail championed In 1906 Demachy continued to write about gum by many including Stieglitz and Steichen, and the in magazines and co-authored Les Procédés d’Art 40 advent of gelatin silver papers along with oil and en Photographie with Constance Puyo. Somewhere 41 bromoil, gum interest wanes. during this time Demachy was wooed away from gum printing by the oil printing process after a In 1921 Heinrich Kühn published Technik der decade of gum practice. Gum continued to be very Lichtbildnerei, in which he says the tricolor gum is popular, with the Richmond Gum Paper, 32 the technically demanding and not yet mastered, with Page Croft Gum Paper 33 and Arbuthnot’s Leto further successes not to be expected. To Kühn, “The Paper all unveiled that year. 34 During that same gum print doesn’t seem to be meant to aid with bringing year Dr. Richard Hiecke of Vienna wrote about his onto paper.” 42 How fascinating that method of making gum prints under the ! 35 gum was thought to be the process that would bring And that was the year that José Ortiz Echagüe color photography to the people, which it now does, began experimenting with direct carbon and gum but not in the “Kodak” way that was envisioned. bichromate. By 1915 Echagüe was a master in the In 1932 the F64 group forms and straight use of the commercial Fresson direct carbon paper photography reigns. This direction dominates and in 1966, Echagüe made a version of this paper 36 throughout the 1940s–1950s and is himself, called “carbondir.” 43 dead. 6 Gum Printing

Figure 1.8. Bank of Mirrors, gum bichromate © Gordon Holtslander 2015. Holtslander uses a 12˝x18˝ cardboard box as a which he loads with rapid access pre-press film that he develops in a custom low contrast developer. Thus no lens in the camera, no digital negatives.

From 1935–1953 there is little mention of the gum Betty Hahn was probably the most well-known process. “Of late years, however, it has regrettably gum printer of the 1960s. She was born in Chicago fallen into disuse among Pictorialists, partly because in 1940. In 1958 she began her B.A. in painting and of certain erroneous beliefs as to its character; partly drawing from Indiana University and continued to because of certain inherent disadvantages; and partly pursue her MFA in photography, studying under because magazine advertising, together with a tendency Henry Holmes Smith. Hahn was introduced to the to mass production methods, has popularized bromide process by Henry Holmes Smith in 1965. 47 She paper for pictorial work.” 44 began extensive research into the process at a time when there was little in writing. Enter the 1960s. Photographers became frustrated Hahn received her MFA in 1966 and then with large corporations controlling the market. moved to New York State where she continued Counterculture interest in alternatives of every 45 her interest in alternative processes at the Visual kind was growing. Betty Hahn, John Wood, Todd Studies workshops, and then taught at the Walker, Bea Nettles, Joan Lyons, Robert Fichter, Rochester Institute of Technology until 1975. From Scott Hyde, Darryl Curran, Alida Fish, Elaine RIT Hahn moved to Albuquerque New Mexico O’Neill, Leah Demchick, Christine Osinski, and 46 where she was a professor at the University of Jeanne Birdsall are some of the photographers New Mexico until her retirement in 1997. She has practicing in this alternative genre. continued to exhibit nationally and internationally. Chapter 1 The History of Gum Printing 7

Figure 1.9. My Sisters—Negative and Positive, gum bichromate on paper 15˝ x 22˝ © Betty Hahn 1965

Hahn pushed the conventions of photography and knew there were formulas available in technical by working in alternative processes and also by books published c. 1920. Helpful but confusing. combining photography with lithography, painting, “I found a useful recipe written by Robert embroidery and fabric. Two of her influences were Demachy in the Gazette des Beaux Arts, published Andy Warhol and Robert Rauschenburg. She in Paris, 1863, and fortunately I knew just received numerous grants during her lifetime and enough French and chemistry to get started. My her work is in multiple museums. Hahn’s work has initial attempts were somewhat haphazard but been highly conceptual since the beginning, at a I was delighted when the images stayed on the time when photography was all about tradition and paper and didn’t wash off. I had to guess at all technique. Hahn was also a woman operating in a the measurements: negative density, amount of male-dominated profession, so introducing fabric watercolor, ratio of water to gum Arabic, exposure and stitching into her photographs, traditionally times, ratio of potassium bichromate to water and considered “women’s work,” pushed the envelope. to gum Arabic. Hahn wrote me, “It is such a strange experience “The first real progress occurred when I bought a for me to remember how much I did not know little Pelouze scale with small brass weights and was about gum bichromate when I started out in 1965. able to weigh everything including the transparent My photography professor Henry Holmes Smith watercolor pigment. Then it was months and suggested I try this process in order to make an months of trial and error. My goal was to find the artist’s book with illustrations on fine paper. He most intense colors with only one coating. For that had never done the process but had seen examples I needed to switch to gouache and force as much 8 Gum Printing

Figure 1.10–1.11. Left, Kodak Tri X Pan Film, gum bichromate on paper 22˝x 15˝ © Betty Hahn 1968. Right, Ultra Red and Infra Violet, gum bichromate on paper 22˝x 14˝ © Betty Hahn 1967.

potassium into solution as possible and similarly Hahn’s process as outlined in Darkroom (New York: get as much gum Arabic as possible into water. I Lustrum, 1977 pp. 81-82) is as follows: she uses always coated the paper with a stiff brush made Arches, Rives BFK, or fabric. Paper is sized with for acrylic painting and almost always allowed the 1.5% gelatin, fabric with liquid starch 1:1 with water. brush marks to show at the edges. She uses 10% potassium dichromate, gum Arabic “When I achieved the kind of look I wanted from powder is about 50%, and her coating solution I limited the trials to finding the best paper and is 1 part dichromate to 3 parts of this thick gum. sizing combination and ended up with printmakers’ Pigment ratio is about 3g to 2 ounces of coating favorite papers such as Rives and Arches with a solution (6% given her coating solution of 1:3). Knox gelatin size in hot water. Once the printing Exposures range from 8–30 minutes depending on results were predictable and repeatable I only the light source. Development is quick, in warm wanted to concentrate on the images...what kinds water, for 5–10 minutes for paper, 15 minutes for of photographs were suited to this process, and fabric, employing a brush if necessary. eventually other non-silver processes. That became an ongoing challenge which has occupied me for years.” Chapter 1 The History of Gum Printing 9

Figures 1.12–1.13. Top, A Ben Day Day, gum bichromate on paper 14½˝x 21˝ © Betty Hahn 1967; bottom, Girl by Four Roads,gum bichromate on paper 14˝x 22˝ © Betty Hahn 1968 10 Gum Printing

Figure 1.14–1.15. Left, 1972 Circus Day, seated self portrait printed with gum bichromate on sized cottom buckram ( a book- binding cloth), cut out and machine stitched to two ply museum board. The circus scene is a magazine transfer made directly to the museum board. 16˝ x 20˝ © Bea Nettles 1972. Right, Beach& Constellations, gum bichromate on sized cotton buckram bordered with green knitted fabric band; stretched around a wooden frame, magazine transfer of the constellations, machine stitching, embroidery and some color pencil. It is a self portrait of Nettles seated on the sofa, she and her two sisters pictured on the beach. 11˝ x 14˝ © Bea Nettles 1971. To see more of Nettles’ work visit beanettles.com.

Bea Nettles says, “I first became aware of gum- this process on fabric was very fragile and contrasty, bichromate around 1969 when I saw a print in a it enabled me to make images that I then quilted museum exhibition while I was a graduate student. I with a sewing machine and stretched onto wooden wondered how it was made, but hadn’t a clue how to frames, a presentation I had already explored as find out. I attended a gum printing demonstration early as 1969 using commercial photo-linen. Often in 1970, led by Betty Hahn at Rochester Institute of I embellished these works with additional colors Technology. I had just arrived to teach in the same and detail, either with magazine transfers, color city at Nazareth College. Betty was a generous and pencils, or in some cases embroidery thread.” gifted teacher and we became friends, and in 1971 T odd Walker, another game changer at this time office mates at Rochester Institute of Technology (1917–1998), was a self-taught pioneer in the field where we both taught. I eventually took over of photography. Born in Salt Lake City and reared Betty’s teaching position in 1976 when she took in Los Angeles, Walker established himself as a the teaching position at University of New Mexico. successful commercial photographer in the 1940s, a The use of pigment in the gum process appealed career he later gave up to pursue his artistic interests. to me as both of my degrees were in painting. Early Starting in the 1960s with alternative processes, in 1971 I began to experiment with the medium Walker developed a unique and personal visual on fabric as I wished to work in color. Although Chapter 1 The History of Gum Printing 11

Figure 1.16. Untitled, © Todd Walker ca. 1963–64. To see more of Walker’s work visit toddwalkerartist.com. language that runs through the last three decades in terms of edition sizes. Among the “alternative of his work. processes” he found some, like the Walker had been dissatisfied with the formal (sometimes called solarization), that accentuated options offered by conventional photographic the edges and lines of forms in a photograph. media and was an avid researcher into the history He referred to this as “the line drawn by light.” of chemistry as related to photography. He acquired Utilizing additive color, he also developed a keen many historical photographic texts and was able color language that infuses much of his work but to translate the historic chemical names used in finds its apex in small lithographic artist’s books formulas into current chemistry. He did extensive made with a succession of techniques including research in the late 1950s and early 1960s with gum optical, darkroom, digital and small offset press. printing, cyanotype, van dyke and collotype; gum In 1981 he began working with digital in particular was an interest since seeing Clarence photography, teaching himself machine language White’s gum prints in a museum when young. He so he could program a computer to process his acquired a small letterpress in 1964 and began self- images. Many of his digital images were printed in publishing letterpress books with his photographs historical processes including gum, collotype and that were printed through the antiquated collotype lithographic prints. process. He later purchased a used lithographic press, which led to greater productivity of books 12 Gum Printing

Figure 1.17. Untitled, © Todd Walker circa 1964

He was a loved teacher and taught for many years visiting artist lectures. Examples of his work can at the Art Center College of Design, UCLA be found in collections around the world including extension, University of Florida, Gainesville and the Center for Creative Photography, LACMA, the University of Arizona, Tucson. In addition, SFMMA, Norton Simon Museum, MFA Houston, he was invited to speak about his work at a vast Biblioteque Nationale in Paris, George Eastman number of colleges and universities around the House and many other collections (as told to me country. He frequently exhibited his work and by Melanie Walker). conducted workshops in conjunction with the Chapter 1 The History of Gum Printing 13

Figures 1.18–1.21. Clockwise from top left: Untitled, © Todd Walker ca. 1965, Untitled © Todd Walker ca. 1965, Untitled © Todd Walker ca. 1965, Untitled (Pearl) © Todd Walker ca. 1969 14 Gum Printing

Figure 1.22. Untitled, © Todd Walker ca. 1969 Chapter 1 The History of Gum Printing 15

Figure 1.23. Untitled, Algarve Portugal, tricolor gum bichromate © David Scopick 2000. To see more of Scopick’s work visit davidscopick.com.

By 1972 Van Deren Coke said, “Now the making Press Collection. It included titles on the history of process has not only become the subject matter for photography and various processes, all reprinted photographers, but by exploring a variety of new and from early publications. One was Nonsilver old processes the shape of ideas as well as images has Printing Processes: Four Selections, 1886–1927 which changed the appearance of what had traditionally been included Alfred Maskell’s and Robert Demachy’s referred to as ‘photography.’ …we do not know as yet 1898 Photo-Aquatint or The Gum-Bichromate where the freedom made possible by new techniques Process. This provided my catalyst to explore the will lead .” 48 methods. Soon after, Arnold Gassan’s A Handbook for Contemporary Photography was published. It This resurgence in alternatives to straight offered four pages on bichromate printing and photography continued. In 1978 the National became my only other reference, along with the Conference of the Society for Photographic few vintage prints I experienced in museums. Education (SPE) said, “The processes that follow cover My efforts proved successful. I was able to make the spectrum regarding a physical involvement with 49 bichromate prints and compiled a broad amount materials...” This desire for physical involvement of research. The need for a contemporary manual with materials continues to this day. was obvious and so I applied for a grant to write The first gum monograph in half a century came out one. My application was approved and thus my in 1978 with David Scopick’s The Gum Bichromate book was born. ” Book. (2nd edition Focal Press in 1991). Scopick In 1979 William Crawford’s Keepers of Light was wrote to me, “I always had a curiosity about published, a book that influenced a lot of people to photography’s early processes. Gum bichromate take up alternative processes, and was the first alt wasn’t well known at the time, but I had heard of book I read, too. Gum is now a staple in alternative it. It held a certain mystique that compelled me to process anthologies. Steve Anchell was inspired by know more. Arno Press came out with a series of Crawford’s book to explore all things gum in the books titled The Literature of Photography, An Arno 16 Gum Printing

Figures 1.24. Parlor, tricolor gum bichromate © Stella Schneider, 2010, a fitting image for a chapter concerned with the history of the gum process as my guess is these artifacts would have come from the era when gum was alive but not yet tricolor.

1980s, as well as by Luis Nadeau’s Gum Dichromate contrast fell into place and I was able to produce and Other Direct Carbon Processes fromArtigue to large platinum prints with detail and tonality Zimmerman (1987). Anchell went on to author rivaling in-camera negatives. Several years later articles on gum printing in the early 1990s (see inkjet printers improved to the point that we could Bibliography) that gave popular exposure to make negatives right on our desktops. It’s been the process. Anchell also helped Photographer’s an exciting ride and it’s gratifying to see legions Formulary start their alt workshops at the end of of alternative process photographers adopt these that decade, and one of the teachers he brought in digital techniques to help express their art.” Dan’s was David Scopick (small world). book Making Digital Negatives for Contact Printing was published in 1995. In 1992 Dan Burkholder discovered digital negatives. This discovery is probably the biggest Since that time, along with more and more boon to alternative contact printing processes in technological advances in Photoshop, printers, and general, tricolor gum in particular. Dan told me, , gum printing interest has been growing. “My first negs were imagesetter negs. A friend in It is not yet the queen of alternative processes as San Antonio had bought into a Service Bureau is platinum and wet plate collodion, but it is a business. When I saw the large negatives slowly healthy niche within the larger niche of alternative creeping from the imagesetter, the gears started process photography, now more often referred turning. After much testing (and lots of wasted to as handmade photography because there’s no platinum) the issues of modifying the image’s longer any large corporation to be “alternative to.” Chapter 1 The History of Gum Printing 17

23 1875 198–200; “Pigment Printing” by J. R. Sawyer December The current niche is attracting photographers who 17 1886 796–7; September 3 1920 545; Kosar, Jaromir. Light like a more hands-on approach, who revel in the Sensitive Systems: Chemistry and Application of Nonsilver Halide materiality of the object—and there’s no better Photographic Processes. NY: John Wiley and Sons, 1965 47–8; Maskell, Alfred and Robert Demachy. Photo-Aquatint or the way to connect with a print than gum bichromate. Gum-Bichromate Process. London: Hazell, Watson, and Viney, Ld., 1898 8. Endnotes 6 Comptes Rendus Vol 35 1853 780; “The History of the Processes 1 “Sur Une Nouvelle Substance de Chimie” in Annales de for the Production of Permanent Photographic Pictures in Chimie, Vol. 25 1798 21. Printers’ inks. Part 1” by R. J. Fowler in BJP May 17 1867 231–2; 2 “Die Chemischen Wirkungen des Lichtes;” in Nadeau, Luis. BJP April 12 1889 251–2; BJP April 26 1889 285; Towler, J. The Silver Gum Dichromate and other Direct Carbon Processes, 1987 1. Sunbeam.... NY: Joseph H. Ladd, Publisher, 1864 20; Kosar 8–9, 3 Ponton’s discovery which he shared with the Society of Arts 47–48; Nadeau 2, 7–9. of Scotland May 29, 1839: “Notice of a cheap and simple 7 Poitevin’s patent: “I print photographically with ink of a greasy method of preparing paper for photographic drawing, in which nature on paper, lithographic stone, metal, glass, wood, or the use of any silver salt is dispensed with” by Mungo Ponton, other suitable material, in the following manner: I apply upon F.R.S.E., Foreign Secretary, Society of Arts for Scotland. “While the surface which is to receive the design one or more layers attempting to prepare paper with the chromate of silver, for or films of a mixture, of equal parts of a concentrated solution which purpose I used first the chromate of potash and then of albumen, fibrine, gum arabic, gelatin, or similar organic the bichromate of that alkali, I discovered that when the substance, and a concentrated solution of a chromate paper was immersed in the bichromate of potash alone, it or bichromate of potash, or of any base which does not was powerfully and rapidly acted upon by the sun’s rays. It precipitate the organic matter of the first solution. This simple accordingly occurred to me to try paper so prepared to obtain or compound layer or film is then dried if the photographic drawings, though I did not at first see how they were to be impression is to be produced by contact; or it may be used fixed. The result exceeded my expectations. When an object in a moist state when the photographic impression is to be is laid in the usual way on the paper, the portion exposed to produced in the . In producing the impression the light speedily becomes tawny, passing more or less into a by contact, the surface is covered with a photographic deep orange, according to the strength of the solution and the negative picture, or an engraving, or other transparent or intensity of the light. The portion covered by the object retains partially transparent object, or screen, and then exposed to the original bright yellow tint which it had before exposure, and light, as in the ordinary photographic process. After a sufficient the object is thus represented, yellow upon an orange ground, exposure, if the surface has become dry or has been used in there being several gradations of shade or tint, according to a dry state, it is moistened with water by means of a sponge, the greater or less degree of transparency in the different parts and, while moist, the greasy ink or matter is applied to the of the object. In this state the drawing, though very beautiful, surface by a ball or dabber, or by a roller or press, or otherwise, is evanescent. To fix it all that is required is careful immersion and it will be found to adhere to those parts only which have in water, when it will be found that those portions of the salt been affected by the light. Thus, if the screen employed be which have not been acted upon by the light are readily a negative, having the lights and darks reversed, the print dissolved out, while those which have been exposed to the will be a positive, with the lights and darks correct; and, if the light are completely fixed in the paper. By this second process screen be a positive, the print will be a negative. The print may the object is obtained, white upon an orange ground, and is be retained on the surface on which it is first produced, or it quite permanent. If exposed for many hours together to strong may be transferred or printed upon paper or other suitable sunshine the color of the ground is apt to lose in depth, but not material, and the operation repeated. I thus obtain a design more so than most other coloring matters. The action of the light upon lithographic stone, or other suitable material, from upon the bichromate of potash differs from that upon the salts which I am enabled to multiply impressions by the method of of silver. Those of the latter which are blackened by light are of lithographic printing by inking the moistened surface with a themselves insoluble in water, and it is difficulty to impregnate greasy ink. I apply various liquid and solid colors upon paper, paper with them in an equable manner. The blackening seems cloth, glass, and other surfaces, by mixing such colors with the to be caused by the formation of oxide of silver. In the case aforesaid mixture of a chromate or bichromate with organic of the bichromate of potash, again that salt is exceedingly matter, and applying this new mixture or combination to the soluble, and paper can be easily saturated with it. The agency paper or other fabric or surface. The photographic impression of light not only changes its color, but deprives it of solubility, is produced upon this prepared surface by the action of thus rendering it fixed in paper. This is rendered more probable light passing through a negative photographic picture, or from the circumstance that neutral chromate exhibits no similar an engraving, or other suitable object, sponge and a large change.” Thomson, James, “Carbon, Bi-Gum and Variants, The quantity of water. The albumen or other organic matter is Discovery that Made Them Possible” in American Photography rendered insoluble at the parts where it has been acted upon Vol 3 1909 160–4. by the light, and the design is thus produced in the color which 4 Comptes Rendus Vol. 10, March 16 1840 469–70; “Pigment has been employed. Mixtures containing different colors may Printing” by J. R. Sawyer in BJP December 17 1886 796–7. be applied to different parts of the surface, corresponding to 5 “Photography in Permanent Pigments with Recent different parts of the negative or screen employed to produce Improvements in Autotype Transfer” by J. R. Sawyer in BJP April the photographic impression. A design in several colors may 18 Gum Printing

thus be produced. The proportions of the materials may be 21 Renger-Patzsch, R. Der Eiweiss-Gummidruck und andere varied. Having now described the nature of my said Invention, Modifikationen des Gummidruck-Verfahrens Anleitung fur and in what manner the same is to be performed, I wish it to Amateure und Fachphotographen. Dresden: Verlag des Apollo, be understood that what I claim is, – First, the mode of printing 1904 (July). 11-13. in the manner of lithography, by moistening and inking with 22 Behrens 898. a greasy ink a lithographic stone, or other suitable surface, 23 Paris: Gauthier Villars et Fils, 1894. prepared with achromatized albumen, fibrine, gum, gelatin, 24 Practical Photographer no. 18 1905 11 quoted in Jay 15. or similar organic substance, and on which a photographic 25 Eder 560; Harrison 370. impression or effect has been produced in manner herein- 26 Nadeau 7. before described. Second, the mode of printing upon paper, 27 “The Artigue Papier Velours and Direct Pigment Processes” cloth, glass, or other suitable surfaces, by applying to them a by Alfred Maskell in BJP December 13 1895 788-90. mixture of liquid or solid colors with the aforesaid achromatized 28 The Photographic Salon in BJP October 8 1897 645-6. albumen or other organic matter, and exposing to light, as 29 The Gum Bichromate Process in America by Mr. G. Hanmer herein-before mentioned, and afterwards washing away those Croughton in BJP August 26 1898 554-5. portions of the mixture which have not been acted upon by the 30 “The Gum Platinum Process” in BJP Oct. 10 1902 802. light, as herein-before described.” Towler 275-6; Nadeau 2, 7-9. 31 The Vol 9 p. 89 “Gum-Platinum Printing.” 8 Towler 277. The process is as follows: “Take a drachm of 32 “Gum Processes at the Croydon Camera Club” in BJP lampblack, reduce it to an impalpable powder and pass it February 23 1906 148-9. through a muslin sieve; mix it intimately with half an ounce of 33 Meeting of Societies, Leeds Photographic Society in BJP a concentrated solution of gum-Arabic and the same quantity Feb 9 1906 115. of a similar solution of bichromate of potassa. Lay on a uniform 34 Meetings of Societies, Croydon Camera Club in BJP June layer of this mixture upon a piece of a paper fixed on a stretcher, 22 1906 496-7. by means of a camel’s hair pencil; as soon as it is dry, it may 35 Hieck, Richard. ‘Direct Enlargements in Monochrome and be exposed beneath a negative to the sun’s rays for a number Three-Colour In Gum Bichromate in BJP April 20 1906 305-7. of minutes, (from four to eight.) The print is then immersed in 36 Information from Sandy King on the alt listserv. water, impression side downward, and left for five or six hours 37 Journal of Photography and Motion Pictures of the in this fluid. Finally it is washed beneath the tap. The gum and International Museum of Photography at George Eastman the coloring matter are retained in those parts that have been House, Vol. 22 No. 2 June 1979 is all about Paul Anderson. impressed; whilst on the others they are dissolved or washed off.” 38 American Photography Vol 4 1910 pp. 182-192 “The 9 “Pouncy‘s Carbon Process” by John Beattie and 345 “The Gum-Platinum Process” by Paul Lewis Anderson; Vol 6 1912 Invention of Carbon Printing” by George Scott in BJP July 16 “Multiple Gum Printing”pp. 676-693; Vol 7 1913 Chs. 1–2 504-514, 1869 337. September 1913; Chs 3–4 584-592 October 1913; Chs 5–6 648- 10 “Discursive Notes on Carbon Printing Without Transfer” by E 654 November 1913; Chs. 7–8 700-710 December 1913; Ch. 9 W. Foxlee in BJP April 17 1896 245-6. 12–16 January 1914; Chs. 10–11 76–80 February 1914 (Vol. 7 is 11 Mummery, “Gum Bichromatic Printing” in BJP August 19 1913, Vol. 8 1914). The stain test was in the October 1913 Ch 1904 728-9. 3; Vol 14 1920 504–516 has Anderson’s “Multiple Gum Printing” 12 The Photographic Journal; Journal of the Photographic article again almost verbatim. Society, precursor title of the BJP, Dec 11 1858 90–94. 39 Jay 18. 13 Photographic Notes June 1 1859 137; “The French Exhibition— 40 Margeson, Henry and Robert Clements. “Gum Bichromate” Mr Pouncy’s Process” A letter to the editors from Pouncy in BJP in the Photographic Journal, Vol 125, April 1985 182. May 31 1867 261. 41 “Technical and Scientific Notes/Gum Printing” inThe Camera 14 Warren, W. J. A Handbook to the Gum Bichromate Process Vol. 29 December 1924 379–82. for Obtaining a Permanent Print in Pigment by Photographic 42 Kühn, Technik der Lichtbildnerei, unfortunately no page no. Means without Transfer. London: Iliffe and Son, 1898 11; Bayley, because I don’t have the original, only a copy from the web. R. Child. The Complete Photographer. London: Methuen and 43 Jenkins, William, “Some Thoughts on the 60s Continuum” in Co., 1906 233. Image, Journal of Photography and Motion Pictures of the 15 “The Artigue Process” in BJP March 20 1896 189. International Museum of Photography at George Eastman 16 “Impressionism in Photography” by George Davison, House, Vol. 15 No. 1 March 1972 15–18. and commentary by others in BJP December 26 1890 821- 44 “The Gum Pigment Process” by Paul L. Anderson in The 26; “Impressionism in Photography—on Mr. Davison’s Paper” Camera. The Photographic Journal of America. Volume L, by Vindex in BJP February 20 1891 117-8; “Impressionism in Number 4, April 1935 217. Photography” by A. J. Treat in BJP February 27 1891 136-7; 45 Harrison 371–3. “Impressionistic Photography” by A.R.S in BJP January 29 1892 46 Ibid 373. 69. “Impressionism and Realism: Their Scope and Limits in 47 Lewis, Eleanor, ed. Darkroom. “Betty Hahn Gumprinting”. NY: Photography” by John A. Randall in BJP July 17 1896 458-60. Lustrum Press, 1977 79. 17 Harrison, Joan. “Colour in the Gum-Bichromate Process, A 48 Van Deren Coke in Image, Journal of Photography and Uniquely Personal Aesthetic” in , Vol 17, Motion Pictures of the International Museum of Photography at Number 4, Winter 1993 369. George Eastman House, Vol. 15 No. 1 March 1972 1–6. 18 Koesters, Dr. Wilhelm. Der Gummidruck. Halle a S. Press of 49 Some Various Processes as Demonstrated at the Process Wilhelm Knapp, 1904 97. Fair, Pamphlet from the National Conference of the Society 19 Ibid, 9. for Photographic Education, Asilomar, 1978. 20 “Death of Mr. John Pouncy” in BJP April 6 1894 218-9. Chapter 1 The History of Gum Printing 19

Figures 1.25. Illusion, tricolor self-portrait © Sam Wang ca. 1988. At this time not much tricolor work was done because of the laborious amount of time it required to make separation negatives in the darkroom. Most color work was done with one film negative and brushing off color where it didn’t belong. For this image Wang created color separation nega- tives in the darkroom, slide to Plus X film. This image, a sort of “ode” to Francis Bacon, was a “” long before the creation of that word. To see more of Wang’s work, visit Chapter 6 Printing Gum over Cyanotype, Chapter 10 Contem- porary Artists, and samwang.us, Figures S1.1–S1.6. Clockwise from top left: Blending In, Standing Out: Clouds, Grass, Cards, Paint Chips, Soup, Bones, tricolor gum bichromate over cyanotype © Kinsey Kline 2014. “I distinctly remember opening my fi rst parcel from Blackmilk; it con- tained the fi rst of many pairs of leggings that would defi ne my wardrobe. They allowed me to stand out; they refl ected the beauty of the world around me. I fl aunted maps, clouds, galaxies, and soup cans. In this series I illustrate the wonder of these leggings by photographing them in context, cans in kitchens, clouds in the sky, grass on the earth.” To see more of Kline’s work visit www.kinseykline.com. Bibliography

I include this lengthy bibliography to save any Meyer, Albert. Der Gummidruck und seine Anwendung in der kunstlerischen Photographie. Halle: Druck und Verlag von Wilhelm future researcher time hunting down articles. I Knapp, 1921. spent ten years researching gum in such places as Nadeau, Luis. Gum Dichromate and other Direct Carbon Processes. 1987. the Mertle Rare Books Library at the University Naudet, G. La Gomme Bichromatée, procédé photographique of Minnesota, the George Eastman House in permettant d’obtenir des épreuves positives artistiques de toutes couleurs à un prix de revient insignifiant. Paris: H. Desforges, 1899. Rochester New York, and by microfilm and Puyo, C. Le Procédé à la Gomme Bichromatée, Traite Practique interlibrary loan in various libraries. I had two et Elementaire a L’usage des Commençants. Paris: Photo Club de Paris, 1904. German translators to help with the German Renault, Henri. Photo-Gomme. Paris: Charles Mendel, 1900–1909. language. Much of my intimate knowledge of the Renger–Patzsch, R. Der Eiweiss-Gummidruck und andere Modifikationen des Gummidruck-Verfahrens Anleitung fur Amateure gum process came from those books and articles und Fachphotographen. Dresden: Verlag des Apollo, 1904. right around the 1900s. My favorite source is the Richards, J. Cruwys. The Gum Bichromate Process. London: Iliffe and Sons, Ltd., 1905. British Journal of Photography where I researched an Rouillé Ladevèze, A. Sepia Photo et Sanguine Photo. Paris: Gauthier estimated 60,000 pages. It reported all noteworthy Villars et Fils, 1894. Scopick, David. The Gum Bichromate Book, Non-Silver Methods happenings around Europe. The bibliography is not for Photographic Printmaking, 2nd ed. Boston: Focal Press, 1991 perfect, but it is extensive. (also 1st Ed. 1978). Warren, W. J. A Handbook to the Gum Bichromate Process for Gum monographs Obtaining a Permanent Print in Pigment by Photographic Means Abbott, Henry. Modern Printing Processes, Gum Bichromate and without Transfer. London: Iliffe and Son, 1898. Platinotype Papers. Chicago: Geo K. Hazlitt and Co., 1900. Whipple, Leyland. The Gum Bi Printing Process. Rochester NY: Behrens, Friedrich. Der Gummidruck. Praktische Anleitung IMP/George Eastman House, 1964. vermittelst Aquarellfarben photographische Bilder herzustellen. Berlin: M. Krayn, 1898, and Der Gummidruck: Anleitung vermittelst Recommended books Wasserfarben photographische Bilder herzustellen. Berlin: Verlag von M. Krayn, 1903. Enfield, Jill. Jill Enfield’s Guide to Photographic Alternative Processes. Massachusetts: Focal Press, 2014. Croizier, Dr. L. Les Insuccès dans le Procédé à la Gomme Bichromatée. Paris: Editions Charles Mendel. 1900s. Hirsch, Robert. Transformational Imagemaking, Handmade Photography Since 1960. Massachusetts: Focal Press, 2014. Emery, H. Le Procédé à la Gomme Bichromatée, Nouvelle Edition augmentée de Formules et de Procédés Nouveaux. Paris: Charles Faber, Monika, and Astrid Mahler, eds. Heinrich Kühn: Perfect Mendel, 1902. Photography. Germany: Hatje Cantz, 2010. Gaedicke, Johann. Der Gummidruck (direkter Pigmentdruck) eine Harker, Margaret. The Linked Ring: The Secession Movement in Anleitung für Amateure und Fachphotographen. Berlin: G.Schmidt, Photography in Great Britain, 1892–1910. London: Heineman, 1898, 1903, 1906. 1979. Hofmeister, Theodore. Der Gummidruck und seine verwandbarkeit Kennel, Sarah. In the Darkroom. An Illustrated Guide to Photographic als kunstlerlisches ausdrucksmittel in der photographie. 2nd ed. Halle Processes before the Digital Age. NY: Thames and Hudson, 2010. a. S.: Wilhelm Knapp, 1907. James, Christopher. The Book of Alternative Photographic Processes, Idzerda, W. H. De Gomdruk. Praktisch Leerboek voor amateur en 3rd Ed. Massachusetts: Delmar Cengage, 2016. vakfotografen. Apeldoorn: Laurens Hansma, 1899. Jay, Bill. Robert Demachy, 1859–1936. Photographs and Essays. NY: Koesters, Wilhelm. Der Gummidruck. Hall A. S. Verlag von St. Martin’s Press, 1974. Wilhelm Knapp, 1904. Nordström, Alison. Truth Beauty: Pictorialism and the Photograph Lambert, F. C. and Thos Harrison Cummings, editors. Gum as Art, 1845–1945. Vancouver: Douglas & McIntyre, 2008. Bichromate Printing, The Practical Photographer Series #14. Chicago: Persinger, Tom. Photography Beyond Technique. Massachusetts: Burke and James, May 1905. Focal Press, 2014. Livick, Stephen. Gum Printing. London, Canada: Livick Rexer, Lyle. Photography’s Antiquarian Avant-Garde. New York: Publications, 2000. Harry N. Abrams, 2002. Maskell, Alfred and Robert Demachy. Photo Aquatint or the Gum Ribemont, Francis, Patrick Daum and Phillip Prodger, eds. Bichromate Process. A Practical Treatise on a New Process of Printing Impressionist Camera: Pictorial Photography in Europe, 1888–1918. in Pigment Especially Suitable for Pictorial Workers. 2nd Edition. New York: Merrell, 2006. London: Hazell, Watson, and Viney, Ld., 1898. Nelson, Mark. Precision Digital Negatives for Silver and Other Alternative Processes. Elgin: Little Joe Press, 2004. 296 Gum Printing

Wang, Sam. Four Decades of Photographic Explorations. China: Henney, Keith, and Beverly Dudley. Handbook of Photography. Jiangsu Arts, 2010. NY: Whittlesey House, 1939. Wilks, Brady. Alternative Photographic Processes: Crafting Handmade Hirsch, Robert. Photographic Possibilities, 2nd Ed. Boston: Focal Images. NY: Focal Press, 2015. Press, 2001. and 3rd Ed. 2009. Yates, Steve. Betty Hahn: Photography, or Maybe Not. Albuquerque: House, Suda. Artistic Photographic Processes. NY: Amphoto, 1981. University of New Mexico Press, 1995. Howell-Koehler, Nancy. Photo Art Processes. Worcester, Mass: Davis Publishing Inc., 1980. Books with gum chapters Hunt, Robert. Hunt’s Practice of Photography. London: Richard ______. Encyclopedia of Photography, Vol 9, NY: Greystone Press, Griffin and Co., 1857. 1967, 1677–1678. Hutchison, James. “Gum Printing” in Some various processes as ______. Focal Encyclopedia of Photography. Great Britain: Fletcher demonstrated at the Process Fair at the National Conference of the and Son, LTD, 1969. Society for Photographic Education, Asilomar, California, 1978. Arcata, Calif.: printed at Humboldt State University, 1978. Abney, W. de W. “Scientific and Historical Preliminary” in The Bichromate Salts in Photography: Six Lectures Before the Affiliation Jordan, Franklin. Photographic Control Processes. NY: Galleon of Photographic Societies. London : Dawbarn and Ward, 1896, 2–7. Publishers, Inc., 1937. Anderson, Paul. Pictorial Landscape–Photography. Boston: Wilfred Kennedy, Nora, Julie DesChamps, and Debra Hess Norris. A. French, 1914; Pictorial Photography, Its Principles and Practice, 2nd Workshop in photograph conservation : Pictorialist processes of the Photo– ed. Philadelphia: JB Lippincott, 1917; The Fine Art of Photography, Secession : Pigment Processes. New York: Metropolitan Museum of 2nd ed. Philadelphia: JB Lippincott, 1919; The Technique of Pictorial Art and Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, 2004. Photography (a reprinting of Pictorial Photography, Its Principles and Kockaerts, Roger and Johan Swinnen. De Kunst Van Het Practice, 1917 and 1923). Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott Co., 1939. Fotoarchief. 170 jaar fotografie en erfgoed. Univ. Press, Antwerp, 2009. Arnow, Jan. Handbook of Alternative Photographic Processes. NY: Kodak’s Creative Darkroom Techniques, 1st Ed. Rochester: Eastman Van Nostrand Reinhold Co., 1982. Kodak Co., 1973, 264–272; Picture Taking and Picture Making. NY: Baldwin, T Stith. Picture Making for Pleasure and Profit. Chicago: Eastman Kodak, 1898; The Modern Way in Picture Making, Published Frederick J. Drake, and Co, 1903. as an Aid to the . NY: E. Kodak, 1905. Barnier, John. Coming Into Focus, a Step by Step Guide to Alternative Kosar, Jaromir. Light Sensitive Systems: Chemistry and Application Processes. San Francisco: Chronicle Books, of Nonsilver Halide Photographic Processes. NY: John Wiley and 2000. Sons, 1965. Bayley, R. Child. The Complete Photographer. London: Methuen Kühn, Heinrich. Technik der Lichtbildnerei, Halle a. d. Saale, W. and Co., 1906, from the 1948 reprint co-authored by R. H. Mason. Knapp, 1921. Berger, Philippe. Le Procédé Color. Procédé aux Poudres du Docteur Langford, Michael. The Darkroom Handbook.New York: Alfred Joseph Sury. Belgique: Edition Philippe Berger, 2000. A. Knopf, 1992. Blacklow, Laura. New Dimensions in Photo Processes, a Step by Step Lewis, Eleanor, ed. “Betty Hahn Gum Printing” in Darkroom. Manual for Alternative Techniques, 4th ed. Massachusetts: Focal Lustrum Press, 1977. Press, 2007. Lietze, Ernst. Modern Heliographic Processes. Rochester: Visual Brothers, A. Photography: Its History, Processes, Apparatus, and Studies Workshop Press, 1974, a reprint of the 1888 original. Materials. London: Charles Griffin and Co., 1899. Mack, Julian Ellis and Miles J. Martin. The Photographic Process, Bunnell, Peter, editor. Nonsilver Printing Processes. NY: Arno 1st Ed. NY: McGraw Hill Book co., Inc. 1939. Press, 1973. Maclean, Hector. 10 Popular photographic printing processes. A Crawford, William. Keepers of Light. NY: Morgan and Morgan, practical guide to printing with gelatino–chloride, artigue, platinotype, 1979. carbon, bromide, collodio–chloride, bichromated gum, and other sensitised papers. London: L.U. Gill, 1898. Davis, William S. Practical Amateur Photography. Boston: Little Brown, and Co., 1923. McDonald, John and Melba Smith Cole. How to Make Old-Time Photos. Blue Ridge Summit: Tab books, 1981. Demachy, Robert, and C. Puyo. Les Procédés d’Art en Photographie. Paris: Photo-Club de Paris, 1906. Neblette, C. B. Photography, Its Principles and Practice, 4th Ed. NY: Van Nostrand Co., Inc, 1946. Duchochois, P. C. Photographic Reproduction Processes. London: Hampton, 1892. Nettles, Bea. Breaking the Rules, A Photo Media Cookbook. Inky Press Productions, 3rd Ed, 1992. Eder, J. M. History of Photography. NY: Columbia University Press, 1945. Newman, Thelma R. Innovative Printmaking: The Making of Two—and Three—Dimensional Prints and Multiples. NY: Crown Farber, Richard. Historic Photographic Processes; a Guide to Creating Publishers, Inc., 1977. Handmade Photographic Images. NY: Allworth Press, 1998. Packham, James, “Gum Bichromate Process” in Barnet Book of Flynn, Deborah. Imaging with Light Sensitive Materials. Rochester: Photography, 3rd Ed. London: Elliott and Son, 1898, 241–252. Visual Studies Workshop Press, 1978. Porkkala, Jalo. Köyhä Dagerrotyyppi. vaihtoehtoisia Frederick, Peter. Creative Sunprinting. Early Photographic Printing valokuvamenetelmiaä. Satakunnan ammattikorkeakoulu, 2012. Processes Rediscovered. London: Focal Press, 1980. Reeve, Catharine and Marilyn Sward. The New Photography. NJ: Gassan, Arnold. Handbook of Contemporary Photography, 3rd ed. Prentice Hall, 1986. Athens: Handbook Co., 1974 and The Color Print Book. Rochester: Light Impressions, 1981. Sanderson, Andrew. Handcoloring and Alternative Darkroom Processes. Switzerland: Rotovision, 2002. Gill, Arthur. A History of the Photographic Bichromate Processes. London: RPS Historical Group, 1978. Sinclair, J. A. “Carbon Printing” in The Bichromate Salts in Photography: Six Lectures Before the Affiliation of Photographic Glafkides, Pierre. Photographic Chemistry, Vol. 2. London: Fountain Societies. London: Dawbarn and Ward, 1896, pp 7–13. Press, 1960, 669–675, “Dichromated Colloids.” Sutton, Thomas. A Dictionary of Photography. London: Sampson Hardwich, T. Frederick. A Manual of Photographic Chemistry, Low, Son, and Co., 1858, 329–331. Theoretical and Practical, 7th ed. London: John Churchill and Sons, 1864. Towler, J. The Silver Sunbeam: A Practical and Theoretical Text-Book on Sun Drawing and Photographic Printing: Comprehending All the Hasluck, Paul. The Book of Photography, Practical, Theoretical, and Wet and Dry Processes at present known, with Collodion, Albumen, Applied. London: Cassell and Co., 1905. Bibliography 297

Gelatin, Wax, Resin, and Silver…etc. NY: Joseph H. Ladd, Publisher, ______. “A Few Words about Gum Bichromate” in The Camera 1864. February 1900 Vol 4 No. 2, 37–8. Van Keuren, Sarah. A Non Silver Manual. Cyanotype, Brownprint, ______. The Beacon Vol 12 1900, 177. Palladium, and Gum Bichromate with Instructions for Making Light ______. “Bichromate Prints” in The Camera Vol 5 October 1901, Resists Including Pinhole Photography. Landsdowne, PA: 1999. 390. Wade, Kent. Alternative Photographic Processes. NY: Morgan and ______. “Gum Bichromate Paper in Printing” in The Camera Vol Morgan, 1978. 5 June No. 6 1901, 218–221. Wall, E.J. Photographic Facts and Formulas. Boston: American ______. The Beacon Vol 14 May 1902, 153–154. Photographic Publishing Co., 1924, and Practical Color Photography. Boston: Am Ph Pub. Co, 1928, Ch X, the Three Color Gum ______. “Gum-Platinum Printing” in The Photogram, Vol 8 1902 89. Bichromate Process, 119–125. ______. “The Gospel of ‘Gum’ in Brief ” The Photogram Vol 9 Ward, Snowden. Figures, Facts, and Formulae, and Guide to Their 1902, 250–1. Practical Use. NY: Tennant and Ward, 1903. 103–104. ______. “Glue Printing: Herr Fleck of Munich” in The Beacon Vol Webb, Randall, and Martin Reed. Alternative Photographic 15 June 1903, 192. Processes: A Working Guide for Imagemakers. NY: Silver Press, ______. The Beacon Vol 15 1903 “Gum–Bichromate Made Easy”, 2000. 83–5. Wheeler, Owen. Photographic Printing Processes. Boston: American ______. “ A Useful Hint to Gum Workers” in The Beacon June Photographic Publishing Co., 1930. 1904, 191. Wilkinson, W. T. “Process Applications of the Bichromate Salts” in ______. “Modified Method in Gum Bichromate” in The Beacon The Bichromate Salts in Photography: Six Lectures Before the Affiliation Vol 16 February 1904, 58. of Photographic Societies. London: Dawbarn and Ward, 1896, 25–27. ______. “Bichromate Poisoning” in The Process Photogram and Worobiek, Tony and Ray Spence. Beyond Monochrome, A Fine Art Illustrator, November 1904, 176. Printing Workshop. London: Surrey Fountain Press, 1999. ______. “Dechromating Gum–Bichromate Prints” in The Beacon Feb 1904 no 2, 59–60. Journals ______. The Camera Vol 8 1904, 319. (Please excuse loose translations of German titles; I had the articles ______. The Camera Vol 9 1905, 367. translated for content not for publication.) ______. The Camera Vol 9 February 1905, 72. 1896 Wiener Photographische Blaetter, published by the Camera ______. “Gum Bichromate at the Hull Photographic Society” in Club in Vienna Volume 3 (1896): “Der Pigmentgummidruck” The Photo-Beacon, Vol 17 July 1905, 222. (The Pigment Gum Print) (Watzek) 70–73; “From Practice of ______. “A Gum Print at the First Attempt” in The Photo-Beacon, Gum Printing” (Watzek) 133; “Der Leimdruck” (Glue Printing) Vol 18 November 1906, 345–6. (Watzek) 149–150; “Neuere Erfahrungen im Gummidruck” ______. “The Method of a Master in ‘Gum’ ” in The Photographic (New Experiences in Gum Printing) (Kühn) 181–187; “Zum Monthly. Vol 13 1906, 363–4, also 279–80. Gummidruck” (To Gum Printing) (Kühn) 229. ______. “A Carbon (Pigment) Process Not Involving Transfer” in 1897 Wiener Photographische Blaetter, published by the Camera Club The Photo-Beacon, ? 1906, 215. in Vienna Volume 4 (1897): “Über die Praxis des Pigmentdruckes” (About the Practice of Pigment Printing) (Hildesheimer) 11–16, ______. “Some Notes on the Gum Process” in The Photo-Beacon, 45; “Farbiger Gummidruck” (Coloured Gum Printing) (Watzek) Vol 18 December 1906, 367–70. 33, 102; “Ein Beitrag zur Technik des Gummidruckes” (An Article ______. “A German Gum-Bichromate Process” (from the on The Technique of Gum Printing) (Henneberg) 65–71; “Der Photographic News) in American Photography Vol 1 1907, 83–86. Gummidruck in Drei Farben” (Gum Printing with Three Colours) ______. The Camera Vol 11 1907, 391. (v. Schoeller) 95–97; “Fortschritte im Farbigen Gummidruck” ______. The Camera Vol 12 1908, 274. (Improvements in Coloured Gum Printing) (Watzek) 121–122; “Verbessertes Gummidruck–Verfahren” (Improved Gum ______. The Camera “Securing Pure Whites in Gum,” 64. Printing Process) (Mallmann) 163; “Erfahrungen Über den ______. The Camera Vol 14 1910 “A Simple Gum Process,” 493. Farbigen Gummidruck im Landschaftsfache (Dreifarbendruck)” ______. The Camera Vol 16 July 1912, 336. (Experiences with Coloured Gum Printing in Landscape Branch) ______. The Camera “Enamel Varnish for Prints” Vol 17 March (Henneberg) 229–236. 1913, 170. 1898 Wiener Photographische Blaetter, published by the Camera ______. The Camera “Gum-Printing” under “Technical and Club in Vienna Volume 5 (1898): “The Combination One Scientific Notes” Vol 29 December 1924, 379–382. Colour Printing” (v. Hübl / Henneberg) 54; “The Gum Prints from Vienna and Hamburg at the Paris Salon” (Puyo) 213–216; ______. The Camera “Non Transfer Pigment Prints” under “Das Chromatbild Beim Gummidruck” (The Chromic Image of “Technical and Scientific Notes” Vol 28 February 1924, 119–122. the Gum print) (Behrens) 225–228; “Über eine Besondere Art ______. The Camera “The Gum-Bichromate Process” August des Pigmentverfahrens” (About a Special Kind of the Pigment 1949, 118–9. Process) (Haschek) 262; “Combination Monochrome Printing” Anchell, Steve. “Gum, A Step by Step Guide to Gum Bichromate by A. Freiherrn v. Hübl. 1898. Printing” in Camera and Darkroom, March 1993, 46–50. ______. The Beacon Vol 6 1894, 83 talks of new papier velours by Anchell, Steve. “Gum Printing” in Camera and Darkroom, April Ms. V Artigue. 1993, 31–37. ______. The Beacon Vol 7 1895, 8. Anchell, Steve. “Gum Dichromate” in Darkroom Photography, ______. The Beacon Vol 11 1899 Under The Printing Room, “Mr. April 1993, 32–37. W. J. Warren on the Gum Bichromate Process,” 244–245. Anderson, Paul Lewis. “The Gum-Platinum Process” in American ______. “Some Gum–Bichromate Hints” in The Camera, Vol 3 Photography Vol 4 1910, 182–192. 1899, 213–4. Anderson, Paul L., “Multiple Gum Printing” in American ______. “Gum-Bichromate Printing” in The Camera Vol 3 1899, Photography Vol 6 1912, 676–693. 210–212. Anderson, Paul L. “The Gum Pigment Process” in American ______. The Photogram Vol 6 1899, 170–1. Color Printing in Gum Photography Vo.l 7 September 1913 chs. 1 and 2, 504–514; Vol 7 Bichromate, from a paper by E. Wallon. October 1913, chs 3 and 4 584–592; Vol. 7 November 1913, chs V– ______. The Photogram Vol 7 1900, 118. VI 648–654; Vol 7 December 1913, chs 7, 700–706 and “Multiple 298 Gum Printing

Printing”, ch. 8, 707–710; Vol 8 ch 9 January 1914, 12–16; Vol 8 Photography at George Eastman House, Vol. 22 No. 2 June 1979, February 1914, ch 10 and 11 76–80; 15–18. Anderson, Paul L. “Multiple Gum Printing” in American Jubb, E. Charles. “Photo-Aquatint (Gum Dichromate)” in Jan/ Photography Vol 14 1920, 504–516. Feb 1984 Aviso, 5–12. Anderson, Paul L. “The Gum Pigment Process” in The Camera. Kilmer, T. W. “The Gum-Bichromate Print” in American The Photographic Journal of America. Volume L, Number 4, Parts Photography Vol 20 June 1926 300–310; July 1926, 358–364; 1–6 April–September 1935. August 1926, 418–425. Anderson, Paul L. “The Fresson Process” in American Photography Kilmer, Theron Wendell. “The Gum Print”, in American Annual Vol 29 October 1935 No 10, 597–610. of Photography 1947, Vol 61, ed Frank Fraprie and Franklin Jordan. Arbuthnot, Malcolm. “A New Gelatine Pigment Process for Boston: American Photographic Publishing Co., 1946, 145–153. Pictorial Workers” in The Camera Vol 15 no. 2, February 1911, King, Terry. “Gum Bichromate Why Now?” in British Journal of 54–57. Photography, Issue 14. London: Henry Greenwood and Co. Ltd., Baker, T Thorne. “Bi-gum up to date” in ? 1958, 158. 3 April 1987. Batty, Dudley. “A Simplified Method of Printing in the Gum– King, Terry. “Ideal Synergy: Printing Platinum over Gum” in View Bichromate Process” in The Camera Vol 27 November 1923, 651–3. Camera, August 2004, 28–32. Blount, David. “The Function of Gum-Bichromate” in The Krug, August. “Printing in Gum” in American Photography Vol 15, Photogram. London: Dawbarn and Ward, Vol 9 1902, 328–9. No. 11, November 1921, 591–600. Coke, Van Deren. “60’s Continuum” in Image, Journal of Photography Leighton, J. Harold. “A Method of Working the Gum-Bichromate and Motion Pictures of the International Museum of Photography at Process” in The American Annual of Photography 1924, 40–43. George Eastman House, Vol 15 No. 1 March 1972,1–6. Libby, Francis Orville. “The Multiple Gum Process” in The Collins, James R. “The Gum Print, Gum Bichromate Printing is A American Annual of Photography 1922, 124–134. Lot More Satisfying When Registration’s Right-On” in Darkroom Lovejoy, Rupert. “Multiple Gum” in The American Annual of Photography, October 1986, 52–3. Photography 1918, 28–33. Davenport, Alma. Popular Photography, December 1992. Mack, Mary. “Special Effects: Alternatives 90–96” and a review Davis, Phil. “Basic Techniques of Gum Printing Part I: History, of Reeve and Sward, Crawford, and Arnow’s books. Darkroom Principles, Why It Works, and How To Do It” in Photo Techniques Photography Vol 7 Nol 2 March/April 1985. Magazine, Jan/Feb 1996, 34–42 and “Techniques of Gum Printing Margeson, Henry and Robert Clements. “Gum Bichromate” in Part II: Refinements, Advanced Techniques, and Digital Separation the Photographic Journal, Vol 125, April 1985, 180–3. Negatives” in Photo Techniques Magazine, May/June 1996, 41–49. Matson, Victor S. “A Simple Method of Gum Printing” in The Davis, William S. “Gum Bromide Printing” in American American Annual of Photography 1925, 42–47. Photography Vol 15 No. 2, February 1921, 53–61. Melvin, Stuart. “The Pigment Over Platinum Print” in View Davis, William S. “Gum-Pigment Printing” in The Camera Vol 26 Camera, July/August 2001, 42–53. No. 11, November 1922, 549–557. Mente, Prof. O. “A New Positive Procedure—“Glue Printing” in Demachy, Robert, “The Gum Bichromate Process” in The Modern The Camera Vol 27 March 1923 144–147. Way in Picture Making. Rochester: Kodak, 1905, 185–190. Moss, Cas. “The Gum-Bichromate Process” in The Beacon Vol 15 Demachy, Robert, “The Gum Print” inCamera Work No. 7, July No. 9, September 1903, 261–6. 1904, 33–37. Muhr, A. F. “Hints on Gum Printing” in American Annual of Demachy, Robert. “The Gum Process” in The Photogram, Vol 10. Photography 1914, 16–23. London: Dawbarn and Ward January 1903, 11–14; February 1903, Namias, R. “On a Means of Improving the Keeping Qualities of 34–38; March 1903, 74–77. Bichromated Colloids” in The Process Photogram and Illustrator. Ed Doherty, Stephen. “Adding Pattern and Texture with Light H. Snowden Ward, Catarine Lee Ward, George E. Brown, Vol 10 Sensitive Materials” in Watercolor Magazine, Winter 1997, 70–79. No. 116 August 1903, 113. Fish–Cronin, Alida. “The Gum Bichromate Photographic Process” Northey, Neil Wayne. “Various Printing Processes” in The in Camera, Feb 1979 No. 2. Switzerland: C.J. Bucher, LTD. Camera,Vol. 44, April 1932, 317–319. Microfilm edition, 26–31. Pepper, H. Crowell. “Gum Printing for the Beginner” in The Fleck, C. “Albumen Pigment Prints” in The Camera Vol 33 1926 Camera Vol 15 No. 1, January 1911 1–10. Dec 380–1. Pepper, H. Crowell. “Gum Bichromate Printing in Colors” in The Fleck, C. “Three-Color Albumen Process” in The Camera, Vol 34 Camera Vol 15 no. 2, February 1911, 45–53. March 1927, 179–180. Pepper, H. Crowell. “Practical Gum Printing” in The Camera Vol 19 Grandmaitre, F. “Procédé à la gomme bichromatée à plusieurs July 1915, 401–410; August 474–489; September 1915, 525–538. couches”. Bulletin de la Societe Francaise de Photographie. Tome X, Pirtle, Kenneth. “Gum Printing, A Creative Alternative” in Annee 1923. Paris: Gauthier-Villars et Compagnie, 1923, 16–19. Darkroom Photography, Vol IV, No. 6., October 1982, 30–33. Griffin, E. H. “The Foxlee Gum Process” in The Photo-Beacon. Vol Pollard, John. “Photo Aquachrome: Full Color Gum Bichromate 19 February 1907, 45–8. Print Process” in The Photographic Journal. London: Vol 131, Oct Hamilton, China. “The Dichromatype—Gum Bichromates by an 1991, 434–8. Easier Route”, in The Photographic Journal, October 1993, 332–4. Powers, A. Merrell. “Three Convenient Accessories for the Gum- Harrison, Joan. “Color in the Gum-Bichromate Process, a Bichromate Process” in The American Annual of Photography 1926, Uniquely Personal Aesthetic” in History of Photography, Vol 17, 216–223. Number 4, Winter 1993, 369–376. Puyo, Major C. “Multiple Impression, Chromatic Printing and Hicks, Roger. “Alternative Processes: Printing Out of the Other Expedients in Gum-Bichromate” in The Photo-Beacon, Vol Mainstream” in Shutterbug, February 1999. 17 February 1905 49–52. Holcroft, Harold. “Notes on the Color and Permanence of Ravell, Henry. “Some Hints on Gum Printing” in American Gum-bichromate Prints” in The Photographic Monthly, Vol 13 Photography Vol 21 No. 7, July 1927, 384–389. 1906?, 300–303. Reeve, Catharine. “Altered States: A Look at the Art and Jenkins, William. “Some Thoughts on 60’s Continuum” inJournal Practice of Nontraditional Photography in America” in Darkroom of Photography and Motion Pictures of the International Museum of Photography Vol 7 No. 3 (1986) May/June, 18–28. Bibliography 299

Sawyer, R. V. “Gum” in American Photography, Vol 27 1933 July 30 1869 368 “Pouncy’s Carbon Printing” to the editor by February 1933, 82–93. Carbro. Seigel, Judy, editor. The World Journal of Post-Factory Photography. March 17 1871 120 “Pigment Printing” by G. S. Penny. New York: Post Factory Press, editor@post–factory.org June 23 1871 203 or 293 Mungo Ponton’s book review “The Spencer, Guy. “Gum-Platinum” in American Annual of Photography, Beginning: Its When and Its How.” 1917, 46–9. April 19 1872 180–1 “The Photographic Image Upon a Bichromate Sutton, Thomas, ed. Photographic Notes Journal of the ” by H. Baden Pritchard. Society of Scotland and of the Manchester Photographic Society. Vol III May 23 1873 242 “On Two Novel Methods of Carbon Printing” April 1 1858 82; May 1 1858 106; June 1 129; June 15 141; July 1 by A. Marion. 158; July 15 1858 163–4; Oct 15 233; Nov 1 245–247; Photographic March 26 1875 148–9 “Is the Light’s Action Continued In The Notes April 1 1860, Vol 5, 99–100. Dark In The Case Of Carbon Printing?” By Mr. Batho. Taylor, Brian. “Places of Magic” in Darkroom Photography Dec April 2 1875 160, “The Continuating Action of Light” by W. de W. 1987, 30–37. Abney, Capt. R. E. and 167, “Emulsion Experiments—Continued Tennant, John, ed. “Zimmerman’s New Method of Gum Action of Light.” To the Editors by Herbert B. Berkeley. Bichromate Printing” in the Photo Miniature, A Magazine of April 23 1875 198–200 “Photography In Permanent Pigments, Photographic Information. Vol X, no 113, 1910. 202–240. With Recent Improvements In Autotype Transfer” by J.R. Sawyer. Thompson, W. H. American Annual of Photography, 1908, 262–264. November 5 1875 53 “Jottings From My Note-Book. The Carbon Thomson, James. “Carbon, Bi-Gum and Variants, The Discovery Process.” W.E. Batho. that Made Them Possible” in American Photography Vol 3 1909, May 10 1876 233–4 “On the Effects of Acids and Alkalis in Carbon 160–4. Printing” by D. Van Monckhoven. Tisa, Benedict. “The New Pictorialists” in Darkroom Photography March/April 1986, 44–47. May 4 1877 207–8 blood poisoning of bichromate. Todd, F. Dundas. “Gum-Bichromate” in American Photography Vol June 1 1877 254–55 “A New Resin—Kauri Gum.” 1 No. 4 October 1907,171–176. Sept 28 1877 463 “Remarks on the Different Degrees of Torgerson, Kimberly. “Gum Evolutions: The Magic, Mystery, and Sensitiveness to Light of the Bichromate Salts” by J. Husnik. Mastery of Gum Printing” in Darkroom Photography. Los Angeles: Nov 16 1877 544–545 On Some New Facts in Photography in Melrose Publications, October 1987, 32–41. Working with Bichromate Gelatine.” Vickers, Luke. “A Plea for the Use of Better Printing Mediums” Jan 9 1880 14–15 gums and mucilage. in the American Annual of Photography, 1917. Feb 20 1880 92 “An Unrecognized Bichromate Printing Process” Wall, E. J. “A Simplification of the Gum Process” in The Photo- by Samuel Casey, M.D. Beacon, September 1905 276. March 10 1882 132 bichromate disease. Warburg, J. C. “Errors and Fallacies in Gum Printing” in The Nov 28 1884 753–4 bichromate disease. Photo-Beacon. Vol 16 October 1904, 311–315. Nov 13 1885 729 bichromate disease. Ward, Snowden. ed. The Photographic Annual. NY: Tennant and Dec 17 1886 796–7 “Pigment Printing” by J. R. Sawyer. Ward, 1909, 139–142. Dec 24 1886 812–13 continuation of article, above; no mention Warren, W. J. “Mr W. J. Warren on the Gum Bichromate Process” of Pouncy in either. in The Beacon Vol 11 1899 244–245. Dec 31 1886 826–827 continuation of above. Waugh, F. A. “Gum Bichromate Printing” in The Photo-Miniature, A Magazine of Photographic Information, John A. Tennant, editor. July 29 1887 474–5 “Printing in Carbon, and Oil Colours, and Vol II, January 1901, no. 22. Photo-lithography” by W. Miles Barnes. Wenzel, Henry Jr. “The Gum Bichromate Process” in The American Aug 5 1887 487–9 continued from above. Annual of Photography and Photographic Times Almanac for 1901. March 15 1889 173–4 Bichromate’s physiological effects. NY: Scovill and Adams Company, 1901, 73–92. March 22 1889 206–7 a remedy for the bichromate disease. Wenzel, Henry Jr. “Bi-Gum in Two Colors” in The Camera March 29 1889 209–10 Bichromate’s physiological effects. February 1900 Vol 4, 48–9. April 12 1889 251–2 “Fifty Years Photography” by W. Lang. Wenzel, Henry. “Permanent Pigments” in The Camera Vol 5 1901 April 26 1889 285 continuation of above. April No. 4, 140. June 20 1890 386 effect of bichromates on skin. Dec 26 1890 821–26 “Impressionism in Photography” by George British Journal of Photography Davison. Dec 11 1858 90–94 The Photographic Journal; Journal of the Feb 20 1891 117–8 “Impressionism in Photography—on Mr. Photographic Society. Davison’s paper” By Vindex. Jan 8 1959 122–130 The Photographic Journal; Journal of the Feb 27 1891 136–7 “Impressionism in Photography” by A. J. Treat. Photographic Society. Jan 29 1892 69 “Impressionistic Photography” by A.R.S. May 17 1867 231–2 and May 24 1867 243–5 “The History of the Feb 2 1894 69–71 on carbon printing, first, then p. 70–1 is Processes for the Production of Permanent Photographic Pictures “Continuing Action of Light” by Foxlee. in Printers’ Inks.” Parts 1 and 2 by R. J. Fowler. April 6 1894 218–9 Death of Mr. John Pouncy (March 27). May 31 1867 261 “The French Exhibition—Mr. Pouncy’s Process” A letter to the editors from Pouncy. Sept 21 1894 598 “Mr. Maskell and Photography.” April 17 1868 181–2 “Obsolete Photographic Processes.” Nov 9 1894 708 “Pouncy’s Carbon Process Redivivus” and 709–711 “Carbon Printing Without Transfer” by Maskell. May 7 1869 217 “On Alkaline Bichromates” by M. A. Davanne. Nov 16 1894 722, “A Resuscitated Carbon Process, and 728–9 May 21 1869 241–242 “On A Greatly Simplified Process of “Carbon Printing Without Transfer” by Maskell. Printing In Carbon Or Other Permanent Pigment” by J. R. Johnson. Nov 23 1894 751 “A Resuscitated Carbon Process.” July 9 1869 329–330 “Mr. Pouncy’s New Process.” Nov 30 1894 754–5 “Direct Carbon Printing.” July 16 1869 337 “Pouncy‘s Carbon Process” by John Beattie and 345 “The Invention of Carbon Printing” by George Scott. Dec 13 1895 788–90 “The Artigue Papier Velours and Direct Pigment Processes” by Maskell. July 23 1869 357 “Photography In Pigments” by George Dawson. 300 Gum Printing

Feb 14 1896 101–2 “On an Improved Method Of Coating Paper 29–30 Correspondence, “The Gum Bichromate Process” by W. for Direct Pigment Printing” by Maskell. Pouncy. Mar 6 1896 150–1 “By the Way by Dogberry.” Jan 21 1898 38–9 By the Way by Dogberry. March 6 1896 156 “Artigue Paper (To W. Benington).” Jan 28 1898 62 under Correspondence Mr. Maskell and “Dogberry” March 13 1896 174–5 “The Artigue Process,” to the editors by to the editors by Maskell. Demachy. Feb 4 1898 78–9 “The Last Word Upon the Gum Bichromate March 20 1896 189 “The Artigue Process.” Process,” to the editors Joseph Lewis. March 27 1896 198–9 “Carbon Prints Without Transfer” by W. Feb 11 1898 88 Jottings. B. Bolton; 208 “The Artigue Process,” to the editors by Chapman March 11 1898 151 “Gum Bichromate Work.” Jones. March 18 1898 175 Manchester Photographic Society March 10 April 3 1896 214–5 commentary by Dogberry. Harry Wade demo-ed gum. April 10 1896 239 “The Artigue Process,” to the editors by Robert March 25 1898 188–9 Our Editorial Table, “Gum Bichromate Demachy. Paper.” April 17 1896 245–6 E W. Foxlee “Discursive Notes on Carbon March 25 1898 190 Meetings of Societies “The Gum-Bichromate Printing Without Transfer.” Process,”at the RPS, Horsley Hinton read Demachy’s paper. April 24 1896 264–5 “Photography with the Bichromate Salts,” April 1 1898 194–5 “On the Gum Bichromate Process and Its lecture by Abney, J A Sinclair. and 271 “The Artigue Process,” to Alleged Uncertainty.” the editors by Maskell. April 8 1898 223 North Middlesex Photographic Society, Mr. May 1 1896 279 Dogberry’s rebuttal; 293 “Carbon or Autotype Mummery read a paper on the gum bichromate process. Printing.” May 13 1898 316 “The Gum Bichromate Process” (review of May 8 1896 294–5 Warren’s book). May 15 1896 312 May 20 1898 327–8 “The Gum Bichromate Process” by J K Tulloch. July 17 1896 458–60 “Impressionism and Realism: Their Scope June 3 1898 355 “Further Object Lesson of the Late Exhibition”; and Limits in Photography” by John A. Randall. 368 “A Gum Bichromate Postal Club.” Aug 7 1896 505–7 cont. of above. June 24 1898 405–6 “Photography in Two Colours.”; 409 “The Aug 14 1896 520–1 “Fifty Years of Photography,” no mention Gum Bichromate Process.”; 413 “Bichromate Printing.” of gum! July 8 1898 437–8 “Gum Bichromate Process” by Gaedicke; 448 Sept 25 1896 613–614 Answers to Correspondents. Oct 23 1896 678–9 “Carbon Printing Without Transfer” by A. Aug 26 1898 554–5 “The Gum Bichromate Process in America.” D. Pretzl. Dec 16 1898 804 “A Modified Gum Bichromate Process.” Dec 11 1896 788 under Foreign News and Notes, “Artigue’s Paper.” Feb 3 1899 68 “The Gum-Bichromate Process” in Foreign News March 19 1897 181–184 “The Bichromated Gum Process” by Geo and Notes. Ewing, and “The Bichromated Gum Process” (a la Henneberg) by Feb 10 1899 86 “The Theory of the Gum Bichromate process.”; 89 A. D. Pretzl; some unknown page “The Artigue Process.” “The Gum Bichromate Process.” April 2 1897 243 Under Foreign News and Notes, “The Artigue Aug 4 1899 487 “Gum Bichromate Portraiture.” Process.” Sept 29 1899 615–7 “The Photographic Salon.” April 30 1897 281 The Gum Bichromate Process in Three Colours.” Oct 19 1900 662 “Direct Carbon Printing without Transfer.” July 2 1897 123 Under Foreign News and Notes, “Fish Glue in the Nov 9 1900 709–10 “Mariotype.” Gum-bichromate or Artigue Process.” Jan 4 1901 17–8 “Gum Bichromate Printing, Caspar Miller’s July 16 1897 452 “Mallmann’s Improved Gum-bichromate formula.” Process.” Feb 22 1901 114 “Poisoning by Bichromate of Potash.” Oct 8 1897 645–6 “The Photographic Salon.”; 647–8 “Historical Photographs in the Photographic Section of the Imperial Victorian Mar 15 1901 162–3 “Gum Bichromate Printing Simplified.” Exhibition at the Crystal Palace.”; 655 “The Bichromated Gum April 5 1901 214 “The Gum-Bichromate Process.” Process,” letters to the editor by George Mansfield. May 3 1901 280 “Exhibition of the Works of Robert Demachy Oct 22 1897, 686 under Correspondence, Joseph Lewis “The at the RPS.” Bichromated Gum Process.” Oct 10 1902 802 “The Gum Platinum Process.” Nov 5 1897 710 March 20 1903 223–4 “Glue Printing.” Dec 3 1897 776–7 “The Gum Bichromate Process,” demo by Dr. April 17 1903 303 “Glue Printing.” O. Clarke. Oct 30 1903 866 “Gum Bichromate.” Dec 10 1897 786–7 “The Gum Bichromate Process I.” May 6 1904 365–6 “Jubilee of the BJP.” . 788–91 Jottings by Cosmos. June 10 1904 518 – BJP history 788–9, “The Gum Bichromate Process” by James Packham. Aug 19 1904 728–9 J. C. S. Mummery “Gum Bichromatic Printing.” Dec 17 1897 802–3 “The Gum Bichromate Process II.” Sept 16 1904 805 “A Simplification of the Gum Process.” Dec 24 1897 830 Under Correspondence, two letters to the editor, Dec 23 1904 1089 “The Gum Splodger.” by W. Pouncy, and Maskell. Jan 26 1906 67–8 “The Foxlee Gum Process.” Dec 31 1897 848 “The Gum Bichromate Process,” to the editors by James Packham. Feb 2 1906 89–90 “A Modified Gum Process” by E. W. Foxlee. Jan 7 1898 14–15 under Correspondence, “The Gum Bichromate Feb 9 1906 115 Meeting of Societies, Leeds Photographic Society. Process,” by Henry W. Bennett. Feb 23 1906 148–9 “Gum Processes at the Croydon Camera Club.” Jan 14 1898 22–3 Jottings by cosmos and “On Things In General” Mar 9 1906 191–2 “A Maker of Gum Paper On The Process.” by Free Lance. Mar 23 1906 233 under Meetings of Societies, The Photographic Club’s meeting March 14. Bibliography 301

Apr 6 1906 276 North Middlesex Photographic Society. Jan 26, 1912, 70–71 under Coventry Photographic Club, gum April 20 1906 305–7 “Direct Enlargements in Monochrome” and demo by Mr. Cawlwood. “Three-Colour In Gum Bichromate.” May 24 1912 402–403 “Use of Chloral Hydrate with Gelatine in May 18 1906 382 “Control in Gum Bichromate Printing”; 388–90 Multi-gum Printing,” by Herr R. Renger–Patzsch. “Some Notes on the Gum Process.” (Dr. Koster’s work) June 14 1912 467 under Photo Mechanical Notes, “The Addition May 18 1906 392 “Gurtner’s Two-Colour Process.” of Ammonia to Bichromate Solutions.” June 22 1906 496–7 Meetings of Societies, Croydon Camera Club. Jan 17 1913 42–44 “A Process of Bichromate Printing” by Herr Sept 21 1906 755 Book review of Les Procédés d’Art en Photographie O. Mente. by Demachy and Puyo. November 29 1918 540 under Royal Photographic Society Nov 2 1906 871–2 “Gum Prints in Colours From a Single (Meetings of Societies). Negative.” Jan 31 1919 50–51 “The Gum Bichromate Process with a New Jan 18 1907 49 “In Praise of Gum” 55. Colloid.” June 6 1919 320–322 “A Method of Multiple Gum-Printing” by Feb 22 1907 143. Charles Macnamara. April 5 1907 25–6 “Colour Photography,” Monthly Supplement September 3 1920 545 under “New Books” Eder’s revision of to the BJP, No. 4 Vol 1 Ernest A. Burchardt. Handbuch der Photographie. April 12 1907 274 “The Influence of Heat in Bichromate Printing.” Oct 22 1920 647. April 19 1907 293 “The Ballad of the Gummist.” May 5 1939 284 from Z. wiss. Phot., Sept/Oct 1938 pp. 195–218. May 10 1907 355–6 Meetings of Societies, the London and Vol 87 1940 303 “Bichromated Prints on Drawing Paper”; 635 Provincial Photographic Association. “Gum Bichromate Prints by Mercury Vapor Lamps.” June 14 1907 438 “The Treatment of Bichromate Sores”; 451–2 July 31 1942 288–9 under Analecta “Gum Bichromate Out of the Exhibitions, M. Robert Demachy’s Oil Prints at the RPS. Photographic Journal.” Oct 11 1907 776 London and Provincial Photographic Association, a demo by A. E. Smith. March 1942 81 talking about a Harold Leighton. January 15 1943 Vol 90 21–22 “Direct Carbon Printing” by H. April 10 1908 292, Vol LV: Mr. C. Wille. E. Durham. Aug 20 1909 654 “Gum Process” under Patent News, no. 27.686 August 6 1943 285–6 “Painting with Water; The Fascination of applied for Dec 19 1908 by Joseph Sury. Gum-Bichromate” by Robert Norman. Feb 11 1910 94 “Ten Per Cent Bichromate Solution.” June 10 1910 435–437 LVII. “Coloured Prints from a Single Negative by the Gum Bichromate Process” by M. Richard Witt. Jan 27 1911 59–61 “The Action of Chromium Salts Upon Gelatine” by Charles Gamble; p. 72 under New Books. April 28 1911 320–321 Notes under Ex Cathedra “Chromium and Gelatine”; under “Ozobrome and Other Chromium Processes Viewed in a New Light” by Thomas Manly. May 5 1911 rebuttal to Manly, under “Chromium Compounds” 338; 350–351 Manly’s rebuttal.