Re: Any experience with Pictorico PGFH White Film?
Philip,
No, don't use it for UV--just black and white darkroom.
As far as I know Kirkland is repackaged Ilford. I also have a couple ink
jet glossy papers to use for black and white that are bigger than 8.5x11, by
Mitsubishi, which do not have logos on the back. If you are printing for
bromoil, mordancage, or chromoskedasic the digital negative printed on
Kirkland is more than adequate sharpness. But nothing will compare with a
fine black and white print from a 4x5 negative!
Thanks for taking a look at the website...we in Montana make do with all
kinds of setups, but I do think Keith Gerling takes the cake, because I am
not printing on plywood yet...but with the economy I just may have to go
that direction especially since I just had to place a $250 order for 13x19
Pictorico!! No, I'm not going to try plywood as a negative :)
Chris
__________________
Christina Z. Anderson
http://christinaZanderson.com/
__________________
----- Original Message -----
From: "Pacific New Media" <panmedia@verizon.net>
To: <alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca>
Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 7:05 PM
Subject: Re: Any experience with Pictorico PGFH White Film?
Thanks Christina. I am surprise that glossy paper can be a good digital
negative material. Does it let UV pass through? I should really try
Kirkland paper. I have old type made in Switzerland. I guess the current
one is not. If you have time to test some of those PGFH white film please
let me know - I can send you some sheets. I have some friends in
photographic material/graphic arts business and sometimes they sent me
samples to try out.
By the way your website is cool. I especially like the photo "Sizing paper
Montana-style" :).
- Philip
Christina Z. Anderson wrote:
Hi Philip,
I have used the Pictorico Pro Photo Gallery Hi-Gloss White Film with BW
only. No need with alternative processes. I did a side by side
comparison of this and plain old cheap Kirkland Professional Ink Jet
Glossy paper and found that the latter worked just as well and the
sharpness/resolution was surprisingly close to the Pictorico, close
enough to not warrant paying a buck or two a sheet vs. 12 cents. In
fact, I just taught curve calibration to 18 students using it for our
negative substrate.
In a side by side comparison, the Pictorico white was quite a bit
denser--my data is at the office but if I remember, it required a stop
(maybe it was 2/3) more exposure than the Kirkland. But my stuff is the
6.7 mils/170 micrometers/213g/m2/iso brightness 92, thicker than that,
below.
Perhaps they have created a thinner substrate, because both of the above
created a "bleed" . I've posted an image here for you to show what I
mean. The little square test targets are 1 pixel, 2 pixels, 3 pixels, and
4 pixels each little dot so it is a scan of 8 of these teeny 1/4 inch
squares, courtesy of Mark Nelson's PDN system tonal palettes. Those
little test targets come in so handy for resolution comparisons:
Chris
http://christinaanderson.visualserver.com/Text_page.cfm?pID=2448
_________________
Christina Z. Anderson
http://christinaZanderson.com/
__________________
----- Original Message ----- From: "Pacific New Media"
<panmedia@verizon.net>
To: <alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca>
Sent: Monday, February 16, 2009 10:20 PM
Subject: Any experience with Pictorico PGFH White Film?
I got some Pictorico PGFH White Film in lower price than Inkpress white
film and wonder if it can be used for producing digital negative for
silver or certain alternative processes.
As I have been told by Pictorico tech support, the specifications for
PGFH are: Thickness 5.2mil (PGHG 6.3mil ), weight is 182 GSM (PGHG 221
gsm). Opacity 97 (PGHG 97, the same). It seems it is a thinner/light
weight version of Pictorico white film products.
Anyone has experience on this product? It is hard to find any
information on the net and seems this PGFH white film has never been
imported into USA before.
Thanks, Philip