Re: Second tricolor print (repro)
David (and Jacek) thank you! I think the pigments I chose are right&good... The actual print is much much better than the digital camera reproduction (I have to elaborate on this -> my repro's suck). I hold the print on my hands right now, and the screen version looks very bad compared to it. (It was late when I was processing the repro.) Will replace it with a proper scan ASAP... I was surprised by the fact that I could do a nice print in just few tries. I guess it's due to long time heavy reading / theoretical preparation (I'm grateful for the fact that masters share their wast knowledge / experience generously.) Thanks again, Loris. 9 Ekim 2008, Perşembe, 9:31 am tarihinde, davidhatton@totalise.co.uk yazmış: > > > That's a nice gumprint Loris! Well done! > David H > > > On Oct 9 2008, Loris Medici wrote: > > Hi all, > > I finished my second tricolor gum print tonight. See below: > > Image -> http://tinyurl.com/4t74l4 > Detail -> http://tinyurl.com/4bsh45 > > Same printing procedure (negative making, pigments, dichromate ratio, > exposure, development and whatnot...) as the first one. > > a) There's no pointillistic effect on this one -> which concludes > that the > pointillism of the first one can be attributed to erasing - harshly - the > badly registered cyan layer and then reprinting it. Probably the > pointillism was caused by the unregistered cyan pigment stain / > leftovers. > (Do you buy that?) > > b) The non oiled paper negatives work perfectly -> sharp image with good > tonality. The actual size of the label is 6.5mm on print (see detail) and > you can read each and every letter / number on that label. > > c) This is a digital camera reproduction since the actual image size > won't > allow me to scan it (9.5x12"). I couldn't set the custom white > balance for > that shot (due the peculiar lightsource) + there's a reflection on > the > upper left corner (print wasn't absolutely flat), so it's an > approximation > of the real print. The actual print is colder (bricks are redder, not as > orange as depicted + highlights are less yellow). Will try to find an A3 > scanner later, in order to scan it properly. > > The image itself isn't much special; I just took it because it was a > colorful scene with lots of texture (thinking "ah, that could do > well for > a tricolor gum practice")... > > I guess I'm close - to ultimate success(!) (read as, to be satisfied > with > what I get). I need to rework the curve, I think I can get better shadow > detail -> this one's a little weak. I would be grateful if you share > your > thoughts. > > Regards, > Loris.
|