Re: solarized gums?
Hi Ilana,
My own experience, observations and tests don't support the notion
that failure to clear (aka pigment stain) is a function of
underexposure, so I wouldn't agree with your tentative conclusion
that "parts that should clear are not, because they have not received
enough light." If you're interested, some test strips showing the
lack of relationship I found between stain and exposure are here:
http://www.pacifier.com/~kthayer/html/stainexposure.html
It sounds like what is happening to your highlights, if I understand
the description accurately, is a phenomenon some people call "tonal
inversion." For my take on this phenom, see
http://www.pacifier.com/~kthayer/html/tonalinversion.html
Hope any of that is useful to you,
Katharine
On Feb 13, 2007, at 9:47 AM, ilana wrote:
Hello Friends,
With all of your added input I am getting the handle on things--at
least
understanding how each element reacts and how to manipulate it to
my needs.
Something weird is happening: I am getting highlights that look
solarized.
The edges are white and the insides are dark. However, other
details in the
print are coming through, and appear as they should be. At first I
thought
my negative was printing negative. It has happened with two
negatives: 1)
which had very dark areas [strong highlights] and 2) a test print
I'm doing
where I having layered two exact copies of a negative onto one
another and
exposed it together [all digital, 300 dpi, negative, with adjusted
levels]
I realized it could be 100 million things, however, I'd like to see
if my
thought are along the right path: The negative is too dense now and
the
parts that should clear are not, because they have not received enough
light. Solutions: 1) use only one layer of neg 2)increase exposure,
less
dichromate, and less pigment, 3)??
Has anyone else ever had this happen?
Thanks,
ilana
|