Re: solarplate
Mark, I think this is the other way around. I know from gruesome personal experience that doing multiple gum printing with a line screen negative is a guaranteed way to introduce some pretty bad moire effects. Doing multiple gum printing with stochastic screens is no problem. I had Copygraphics make a an aquatint screen for me a few months ago, and it is a stochastic screen using their Icefields software. Clay > Jon, > > I spoke with Peter at Copy Graphics about the fabrication of aquatint > screens > on their imagesetter a few years ago. I could be wrong on this, but it > seems that the users were having best luck with using a line screen output > for the > aquatint screen rather than a stochastic method when used in combination > with > a negative that was made with diffusion dither or stochastic method. > It > appeared that there was less problem with interference patterns I believe. > > Best Wishes, > Mark Nelson > > Precision Digital Negatives - The System > PDNPrint Forum at Yahoo Groups > www.MarkINelsonPhoto.com > > > In a message dated 1/23/07 11:57:08 AM, jon@terabear.com writes: > > >> 80% density is the rule of thumb. Not sure what the standard >> 'solarplate' one uses in terms of dpi, but Duane at Copy Graphics in >> Santa Fe would know. He's who I've been going through for mine. I >> believe the standard screens are something like 300 or 400 dpi... >> >> http://www.copygsf.com/ >> >> Any service bureau with an imagesetter should be able to produce these >> kinds of screens, however. >> >> I've been using an 1800 dpi stochastic screen using an Olec exposure >> unit. I don't recommend it for learning one since there are many more >> technical challenges with using the finer screen -- solid contact >> becomes all the more critical, but I think better results. >> >> Jon >> > > > > > > > > > >
|