Re: Paper Negatives
Actually, it was your mention of vellum that was the reason for sending that link - but I forgot to point that out specifically. Freedom Paper sells some very cheap vellum paper. But if you call them, and happen to talk to Hugh, and he tells you that he will send samples - don't believe it.
On Dec 5, 2007 10:59 AM, < pulpfic@telus.net> wrote:
At 07:29 AM 12/5/07 -0600, Keith Gerling wrote:
Randi,
You may be interested in some of the offerings from Freedom Paper.
I received this yesterday:
http://www.freedompaper.com/s.nl?sc=2&category=&search=75010C-13x19
That's 200 sheets for 28 bucks and free shipping. It is very thin
but is works perfectly in my Epson 1280. The un-oiled/waxed paper
in (by the eye - I haven;t tested it yet) appears to be as translucent as
oiled copy-machine paper.
Keith
Oh, yes, that is very budget-conscious! Too bad there is no image of the
stock, but it sounds very similar to the Chartham Translucent I use. I've
bookmarked your link in case I ever switch to inkjet printing for
negatives. I don't mind the slight screen look to the digital negatives
for my purposes, so I'm pretty well set for cheap negatives.
Just for fun, I tested baby oil on a black laser print made on cheap 20
lb. bond paper, and it worked like a charm, without smearing or removing
any toner, and no scrubbing required, so there's another really cheap
option.
Take care,
Randi
On Dec 4, 2007 12:55
PM, <pulpfic@telus.net >
wrote:
Hi all,
I've always used transparency material to make laser-printed negatives
for
cyanotype (and my few mediocre attempts at one-coat gum).
Something is wrong with my laser printer these days, because there
are
clear lines along the transparency where it seems some toner has
been
scraped off by something along the drive path in the printer. But
as there
is no toner removed when printing on ordinary paper, I've decided to
stop
using transparencies for negatives.
Oiled paper was one of my choices as a substitute, but I thought I'd
give
translucent paper (fake vellum) such as Chartham Natural Translucent (17
lb.) a try as a shortcut to the effect of oiling regular paper.
Haven't
tried it yet, but I'm sure it will work just fine. As soon as we get
some
solid sunshine again, I'll try it out.
I have all my C.N.T. stock cut to 8½ × 11 as that's a convenient size
for
me, but it comes as 23 × 35 inch parent sheets, if anyone has the
ability
to make printed negatives that size. Not sure if it will print well
with
inkjet, though; it doesn't like "wet" ink all that much.
The only drawback I can see is that Chartham Natural Translucent is
about
the same cost as transparencies, if not actually a little more. But
I've
already paid for a big stack of it cut to size, so now it's
"free". 8^D
Just a thought.
Take care,
Randi
--
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
*
Ms Randi DeLisle
bookbinder, publisher, printmaker & photographer
pulp fictions & pulp fictions press
Grand Forks BC
Canada pulpfic (at)
telus.net
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
|