Baren Digest              Monday, 19 February 2001      Volume 14 : Number 1325


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

From: Legreenart@cs.com
Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 01:21:17 EST
Subject: [Baren 13465] Re: Baren Digest v14 #1320 

Dear Dean,
    More and more, some things I remember are not remembered by others... It 
often isn't necessarily a memory fault of mine, it is often that it is a sign 
that I am getting older, and not everyone has been aroound long enough to 
have as many memories as I do! 
    I am remembering back some 20 years ago, when safety of products was a 
new concern for most consumers, and brand new responses to that concern were 
being formulated. I believe I made reference to the fact that I was dredging 
up an obsolete example, one that occurred during early development of new 
safety standards. At the time, there had not been a code generally accepted. 
The voluntary labeling under the ASTM only started in the early 1980's, and 
Congress did not pass the Labeling act until 1988. 
    I am sure of the recollection that a pigment was removed from watercolors 
on our shelves and not from the oil colors. I remember this because it was 
given to me to go through the tubes of paint in the store remove those 
containing that pigment. But I was told not to remove oil colors . A written 
notice contained the argument (perhaps later discounted) that the oil would 
prevent ingested pigment from being absorbed, so oil colors were safe...I 
will not say which pigment I think it was, because that is the part I am not 
sure of, and  I would rather not do the exhaustive research to prove whether 
it was this or that particular pigment. Because, the point is being lost......
    The point of my originally bringing up this example, please do not miss 
this, is that many of the artists who have discussed toxicity questions have 
equated oil with toxicity and water with harmlessness. And I do not think 
that this equation, this assumption, is not a good idea. Just because it 
dissolves in water does not make it safe. 
    Which brings us back to your opening line, "Read The Label"

Yours, 
Le Green
Stonemetal Press
Email: legreenart@cs.com
Website:  www.stonemetalpress.homepage.com

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

From: David Bull <davebull@woodblock.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 15:25:37 +0900
Subject: [Baren 13466] Re: Printing on Tyvec ... 

Wanda wrote:
> ... we found that many
> of the Kampala artists were doing prints on cardboard and on pellon-type fabric,
> and on Tyvec - the stuff they use to insulate the outside of houses before they
> put the siding on them. Beautiful pieces of art. Wonderful composition, wonderful
> images, haunting colors - we were amazed at the inventiveness.

For those who missed them, some images from the Kampala show are at:
http://woodblock.com/encyclopedia/entries/017_06/017_06.html

The image labelled as '_uganda_print02' was done on Tyvec, I think ...

***

Steve wrote:
> Still, better to have inked and spooned then never to have printed at all. 

Welcome back Steve; nice to hear you're getting your hands dirty!

Dave


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

From: "Bea Gold" <bnj50@earthlink.net>
Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 22:48:32 -0800
Subject: [Baren 13467] Re: More from Murilo in Brazil charset="iso-8859-1" 

Not to worry Murilo - Nice to hear from you when I hear from you.  Now was
the wall paint water or oil based? Bea Gold

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

From: "Bea Gold" <bnj50@earthlink.net>
Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 23:01:19 -0800
Subject: [Baren 13468] Re: Salon De Refuse charset="iso-8859-1" 

Hey Dan am I right that we are now talking about two different prints -
Baren being 71/2"x81/4" and this one 11"x15"?  I thought those on the Baren
#9 would just print additional prints.  Is that what you were thinking?  Bea

>Size:  11X15  (No greater than, smaller than is O.K.)



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

From: Wanda <robertson@canby.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 00:58:32 -0700
Subject: [Baren 13469] Re: Salon De Refuse 

Bea Gold wrote:
> 
> Hey Dan am I right that we are now talking about two different prints -
> Baren being 71/2"x81/4" and this one 11"x15"?  I thought those on the Baren
> #9 would just print additional prints.  Is that what you were thinking?  Bea
> 
> >Size:  11X15  (No greater than, smaller than is O.K.)

I don't know about the rest of the refugees (or is that refusees?) but I plan to
carve & print a different image for each of the exchanges, but use the same size
paper on both. I love the idea of being an unwanted (unwashed?) outcast from the
proper exchange = even though I *am* on the waiting list and may still make it
into the #9 exchange.

Wanda

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

From: "Daniel L. Dew" <ddew0001@tampabay.rr.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 07:20:33 -0500
Subject: [Baren 13470] Re: Salon De Refuse 

Yes.  And No.  I didn't want the Baren Exchange folks to have to do more on
a different size, So the size is "open", just a request to no larger than
11x15.

dan dew



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

End of Baren Digest v14 #1325
*****************************