U of S | Mailing List Archive | alt-photo-process-l | Re: Paper Negative Details

Re: Paper Negative Details

John, again,

I think you as well as Henk may have missed my point, and no doubt that's my fault for not saying it enough times. But I'll say it again: I don't need to experiment with paper for paper negatives because I found a paper years ago that works beautifully, and still does, as far as I know (Andrea's recommendation suggests that it indeed still does). It's Epson PhotoQuality Inkjet Paper; it's quite cheap, currently about $13.99 for 100 sheets, and it works very nicely. It has a light coating on it that takes the ink nicely for a sharp crisp print, but doesn't interfere with oil. It's the papers with a heavier coating, the glossy photo papers (more expensive) that I was not recommending because they tend to mottle and crack when treated with either oil or wax, in my experience; the PhotoQuality Inkjet paper isn't subject to that problem. Hope that's all clearer,

On Dec 4, 2007, at 2:50 PM, Katharine Thayer wrote:

John, re using cheap uncoated paper for paper negatives:

Doesn't work well, to my taste. You need a light coating on the paper to hold sharp edges; uncoated paper (a) tends to make a softer print and (b) tends to have more internal texture that can print. But thanks for the suggestion.