U of S | Mailing List Archive | alt-photo-process-l | RE: Another vellum question

RE: Another vellum question

Interesting.  Too bad that Print 1000 didn't work too well as a negative;
I've heard it makes very nice digital prints.

I bought some no-name 100% cotton vellum a while back and tried it as a
substrate for pt/pd.  My exposure times were very close to my Pictorico
times, but the print quality on the vellum (and ultimately the print) left
a lot to be desired.

Camden Hardy


On Fri, September 29, 2006 1:22 pm, Don Bryant wrote:
> Hi Camden,
> It's odd that you asked this question today since last night I tested
> Clear
> Print 1000 vellum. Unfortunately, it seems to be nearly opaque to UV
> light.
> A one hour exposure only produced minimal density with traditional
> cyanotype. Perhaps a more powerful UV source would work more effectively.
> I was interested in using Clear Print since negatives printed on it have a
> large dot gain producing a very soft looking image.
> It does make an interesting inkjet print though, used with a RIP for B&W
> printing or just color using the printer driver might yield a unique look.
> Don
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Camden Hardy [mailto:camden@hardyphotography.net]
> Sent: Friday, September 29, 2006 3:05 PM
> To: alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca
> Subject: Another vellum question
> While we're on the topic of vellum, I too have a question (I didn't want
> to hijack Sandy's post, so I'm starting a new thread).
> How about a high quality vellum that would make a good digital negative
> substrate?  I'm looking for something that prints well on an inkjet
> printer, but is transparent enough to act as a negative.
> Thanks,
> Camden Hardy
> camden[at]hardyphotography[dot]net
> http://www.hardyphotography.net