Re: solarplate
Thanks for the info, Jon. How would I have a local printer make an aquatint
screen for me, or do they automatically know how? What specifications would
I ask for?
Chris
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jon Lybrook" <jon@terabear.com>
To: <alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca>
Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 9:46 AM
Subject: Re: solarplate
Thanks Chris,
Glad to hear you're working in polymer/solar plate and PDN. I'll be eager
to hear when you've got more info on that. Thanks for the info on
printers too.
I tried making "aquatint" screens on the 2200 early on. Partly due to
Peter Elzy's advice and what I saw under a lupe, I found the screens from
an image setter were sharper and more durable. Those off the inkjet
printer didn't have the hard dot required to get a nice clean set of dots
on the plate to hold the ink. Careful handling and the store-bought
screens can last a long time.
Best wishes,
Jon
Christina Z. Anderson wrote:
The subject of solarplate came up, and as I am participating in a
collaborative printmaking project with faculty/students from several
colleges with solarplate as a basis, I thought I would add a couple
things to the discussion. The group will end up with a collaborative
portfolio, some drawing directly on the plates, some combining
photographic and drawing processes, some using the film stuff Z'Acryl
(that and Imagon I know nothing about), some not doing solarplate at all.
I am testing several methods of negatives for this process. The first
two dispense with the double exposure/aquatint screen, and are lower tech
ways of teaching solarplate to those not digitally savvy.
One is a simple bitmap--input 600/output 600, black ink only. That works
very well for detailed imagery, as it incorporates a dot pattern into the
image that ends up not being perceptible in the final image. However,
the printer you use to make your negs really determines exposure time.
For instance, the Epson 2400 blacks are not very dense, but the Epson
3000 and Epson 2200 are. And, if there are areas of large darks in the
image, they will still open bite. Solarplate has two major problems,
open bite, and mottledness.
Second, is the Henrik Boegh method of making your image a halftone--you
first lower the tonal range of the image with a curve, by pulling down
the top right of the diagonal curve line so that input is is 100 output
is 80, then under your print with preview screen adding a halftone screen
at 65 lpm/45 angle/diamond. This works surprisingly well, but of course
you are clipping tones with the way of handling the curve. There, too,
was open bite in larger areas of dark, so for a really dark image like,
for instance, Flor Garduno (sp?) does, it might not be the best.
Third, the most accurate and professional way of handling solarplates but
one that requires more digital savviness: I am biting the bullet and
using the aquatint screen exposure/negative exposure--doing the double
exposure technique. I know there is a way to create a stochastic
aquatint screen in computer if anyone can share it, but I bought the
thing--not cheap. So now I am working at calibrating exposure times with
the screen and then the negative, and then after I get that proportion
figured out (solarplates under UVBL are about 10 minutes total exposure
and the aquatint screen can be up to 1/3 or 1/2 that) I will then
calibrate a custom curve using the Precision Digital Negatives system and
colorized negs. On this one, no open bite.
I will highly recommend two books, the Heinrik Boegh Handbook of NonToxic
Intaglio and Welden's Printmaking in the Sun. Both are must-haves. The
Keith Howard books are also good, but I find myself referring to Boegh's
the most. Second, buying the plates directly from Dan Welden is pretty
darn cheap, aside from the fact he is so nice and helpful.
Hope this helps whoever it was many emails ago who asked questions on
solarplate!
Chris
|