Re: Epson 3000 still a viable option?

[Erie Patsellis <erie@shelbyvilledesign.com>]

Judy Seigel wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Nov 2007, Erie Patsellis wrote:
>
> > Don,
> > I already have a HP8750 that I like, but the 13x19 limit is a little 
> > restrictive (alot of my work is scanned LF negatives, that due to a 
> > lack of darkroom, I can't print at the moment) With my upcoming 16x20 
> > camera almost finished, I have a way to scan, but not print, and it 
> > seems pointless to scan a 16x20 neg to print smaller.
> Erie, there are many easily done "alt" processes that don't require a 
> darkroom... they're not that light-sensitive: You can do, for instance,
> cyanotype & Van Dyke (to name just the easiest ones) in normal room 
> light, though you do need ultraviolet bulbs to print them. (Unless you 
> can find some sun.)
>
> Judy
Judy, prety much what I've been doing, primarily Gum and (soon, 
hopefully) Cyano.  I do have a NuArc plate burner, it has given me some 
consistency in my gum printing, another few uninteruppted evenings and I 
should have it pretty much repeatable. My biggest issue is I have a 
photo budget the last few months of precisely $0, so I either make, 
modify or sell off and buy. If I had a little more available cash, my 
20x24 camera would have been done months ago.


erie