Buxton paper

[nogar]

Hello!
Where can I get Buxton paper in the United States?

 

[pjbtx]

You might try New York Central Art Supply found at this link:

However, a paper with very similar sizing formulations and that is more widely found is Fabriano Artistico Extra White.

Hope that helps.

 

[RobertP]

Two completely different papers. The Fabriano EW will probably require an acid bath to make it suitable for pt/pd printing. The Buxton will coat and print out of the pack. But the Buxton is a very expensive paper.

 

[payral]

Here is your answer:
Dead Link Removed

 

[pjbtx]

In response to Robert, the original poster did not specify how the paper was to be used. Fabriano is not "completely" different from Buxton. Both are Aquapel sized which for gum bichromate printing makes them both suitable. However, since I do not pt/pd print, I defer to your expertise as to their viability for that process.

 

[boyooso]

www.talasonline.com

here is a link to the product on their website.

Dead Link Removed

Nice paper

Corey

 

[RobertP]

Sizing is just one characteristic of paper. Have you done a side by side comparison of both papers? There is texture, color..ect...ect. Fabriano works well for gum because it doesn't change size much after it has been coated and then exposed and developed. This helps tremendously when you are doing more than one layer of gum as far as registering your negative. But you are correct, the original poster didn't mention which process he will be using. So you can't assume he is doing gum layers either. I think if you look closely at both papers you will see a significant difference. Without acidification the Fabriano EW is pretty much worthless for printing in most iron processes. ( unless something has changed in the past year with the manufacturing) At least that has been my experience with it. If I'm not mistaken I think Buxton was developed with the iron processes in mind.

 

[pjbtx]

In response to Robert, all I said was that the sizing characteristics of the papers are similar. I leave it to the original poster to determine if that is important. Also, I only said that Fabriano is more readily available, at least here in the US. I beleive that to be true. And, yes I have used Buxton with gum and it prints virtually identical to Fabriano. So since Fabriano is more readily availble and less expensive, I thought the orignal poster might want to consider that, too. I agree that Buxton seems to have been produced with iron processes in mind. The handmade quality, which to me is the major visual difference, is also appealing. However, the Aquapel sizing also makes Buxton it a good choice for gum, too. For producing quality gum prints, they are both, however, very capable papers producing similar results.

 

[RobertP]

Again you are assuming that it will be used for gum printing. In which you are gelatine sizing the paper and then adding multiple layers of gum over it. This method is entirely different than the iron process where the solutions are permeated into the paper. It would be misleading to suggest that the two papers are close to being the same or similar in results without explaining how they react to all the processes. If without knowing what method the paper is intended for you recommend and suggest that these two papers are similar and then the printer goes to coat a sheet with an iron process, he will be highly disappointed to see the results. Even with acidification the two papers have different characteristics and aesthetics when being used with the iron processes.

 

[pjbtx]

Robert. I guess it's best to wait to hear from the original poster as to what the paper will be used for. I should have said that at my first post. Hopefully, with the other responses given, a source has been found for the Buxton paper. I still stand behind my first post, however, and only provided that information for the initial poster to consider. Now, as for gelatine, I gave that up long ago. I only use AKD sized paper. Others use gelatine with tremendous results, but gelatine is no longer the only approach to gum printing. I cannot speak for other processes.

Buxton and Fabriano are similar in results in that a good contrast, fairly sharp image can be obtained with either paper without any additional sizing. I say that with personal experience. By the way, I have seen wonderful cyanotypes on both papers.

Maybe all of this is moot as all the original poster wanted was to know where is to get Buxton. NYAS is where I got my few sheets several years ago.

By the way, this is my first ever post. I didn't expect to get flamed already. Please relax, I didn't mean any harm.

 

[RobertP]

No harm done. I didn't mean to sound as though I was "flaming" you. But if you notice, it is the original poster's first post also. I just didn't want him to be misled into thinking the two papers are alike. New York Central has had Buxton in stock for years.

 

[pjbtx]

Sorry, I didn't notice that the poster was new, too. I guess we're all getting a good education. I'm still getting used to feeling my way around this site.

I agree, the papers aren't exactly alike. But for gum printing, they can and do respond almost the same. At least, I can't tell the difference. Indeed, paper texture, paper tones, etc are different as one would expect from papers that are made by different companies using different methods - but performance is very similar.

Maybe this web address might be helpful. It gives an idea of how I approach my work.

http://www.alternativephotography.com/artists/peter_blackburn.html

 

[donbga]

Sizing is just one characteristic of paper. Have you done a side by side comparison of both papers? There is texture, color..ect...ect. Fabriano works well for gum because it doesn't change size much after it has been coated and then exposed and developed. This helps tremendously when you are doing more than one layer of gum as far as registering your negative. But you are correct, the original poster didn't mention which process he will be using. So you can't assume he is doing gum layers either. I think if you look closely at both papers you will see a significant difference. Without acidification the Fabriano EW is pretty much worthless for printing in most iron processes. ( unless something has changed in the past year with the manufacturing) At least that has been my experience with it. If I'm not mistaken I think Buxton was developed with the iron processes in mind.

I have a friend who prints with great success on Buxton paper. I don't know if she sizes the paper or not or preshrinks it but she reports that it works great for gum printing which I was very surprised at.

 

[Dana Sullivan]

Bostick & Sullivan will be carrying the Buxton paper(s) starting in September or October of this year. Ruscombe is almost out of stock, and won't be making another run of Buxton until then, so I plan on buying a nice sized chunk of it. Has anyone had experience with the 240 GSM version of this paper? The 160GSM version is beautiful, and prints nearly flawlessly, so I'm wondering if there's any advantage to stocking 2 weights of the same paper. In my experience, it's much easier to find heavier papers that worki well with Pt/Pd and other iron processes, while thinner papers are less common.

One thing I've noticed about the Buxton is that it doesn't like to be "over coated". Basically the paper seems to 'float' itself: I pour my emulsion across the center of my paper, rapidly spread it up/down, left/right, up/down, left/right, for about 10-15 seconds and then stop. Any streaks or uneveness disappear as the solution levels itself on the surface. I simply let it sit for about 4-5 minutes, then dry it with a small desk-top fan. Many papers like to have the emulsion worked into them, especially harder papers like the COT-320 and Platine, or else you get uneven coatings or streaks, especially when you use the old Hake brushes like me. The Buxton is the complete opposite. Even though the surface is tough enough to withstand a longer coating, the image quality suffers when you brush it for more than a few secods.

Another anomaly I noticed with Buxton is an odd plating out or solarization if you print traditional Pt/Pd with too much humidity in the paper. Normally, I can print Pt/Pd slightly damp and notice a fairly strong printing-out effect while exposing. As soon as the print goes in the developer, though, you'd never know that it had ever printed-out. With the Buxton, you either need to decide on a complete print-out image, or a complete develop out image. If you allow it to print-out a little bit, then stick it in your developer, the printed-out areas will have a completely different look and color from the developed-out areas. Very odd, indeed.

-Dana

 

[clay]

i have both weights of this paper on my paper shelf, and they are very similar, as you would expect. The main use for the 240gsm paper would be if you intend to make large, full-sheet-sized prints. My personal preference is for the lighter weight version.

I have never noticed the solarizing effect you are mentioning, but it makes sense with what you are saying about not overcoating the paper. In my experience, solarization appears to happen mostly when there is too much exposure hitting too little coating solution on the paper. That is why it always seems to appear first on the very margins of brush coated papers where the coating solution is at its thinnest. At least that is my theory. The dampness may come into play because highly humidified paper is faster than super dry paper, and this allows you to reach Dmax more quickly. If I am printing on a humid day, I often will back off my exposure a bit. The other night, I was printing at 65% RH ambient, and I had to drop my exposure by 10% to match some prints made the previous week at 40% RH.

Bostick & Sullivan will be carrying the Buxton paper(s) starting in September or October of this year. Ruscombe is almost out of stock, and won't be making another run of Buxton until then, so I plan on buying a nice sized chunk of it. Has anyone had experience with the 240 GSM version of this paper? The 160GSM version is beautiful, and prints nearly flawlessly, so I'm wondering if there's any advantage to stocking 2 weights of the same paper. In my experience, it's much easier to find heavier papers that worki well with Pt/Pd and other iron processes, while thinner papers are less common.

One thing I've noticed about the Buxton is that it doesn't like to be "over coated". Basically the paper seems to 'float' itself: I pour my emulsion across the center of my paper, rapidly spread it up/down, left/right, up/down, left/right, for about 10-15 seconds and then stop. Any streaks or uneveness disappear as the solution levels itself on the surface. I simply let it sit for about 4-5 minutes, then dry it with a small desk-top fan. Many papers like to have the emulsion worked into them, especially harder papers like the COT-320 and Platine, or else you get uneven coatings or streaks, especially when you use the old Hake brushes like me. The Buxton is the complete opposite. Even though the surface is tough enough to withstand a longer coating, the image quality suffers when you brush it for more than a few secods.

Another anomaly I noticed with Buxton is an odd plating out or solarization if you print traditional Pt/Pd with too much humidity in the paper. Normally, I can print Pt/Pd slightly damp and notice a fairly strong printing-out effect while exposing. As soon as the print goes in the developer, though, you'd never know that it had ever printed-out. With the Buxton, you either need to decide on a complete print-out image, or a complete develop out image. If you allow it to print-out a little bit, then stick it in your developer, the printed-out areas will have a completely different look and color from the developed-out areas. Very odd, indeed.

-Dana

 

[RobertP]

Dana, New York Central lists the Buxton at 180 GSM and 240 Gsm. I've used the 180 GSM and it is probably one of the nicest papers I've ever used for pt/pd. I know a lot of people will consider it to expensive but if you compare it with other handmade papers the price is reasonable. In 2006 I paid 11.00/22x30 sheet, so I imagine it has went up since then. I just proof on another paper and then try to nail the final print on the Buxton. Sometimes I get lucky. Its great you are considering carrying it. By offering smaller sizes I'm sure it will entice others to try this gorgeous paper. - Robert