Re: Poor man's negatives
I guess I don't understand why you would go to this trouble when
there is very good cheap inkjet transparency film available that's
already nicely coated. The transparency film I use is $10.55 for a
box of 50 letter-sized sheets and around $20 for a box of 50 11x17;
that's my idea of a "poor woman's negative" and a lot less bother,
and works great.
katharine
On Aug 7, 2009, at 9:53 PM, Jacek Gonsalves wrote:
Hi all,
I purchased some Golden digital ground from my art supplier. Its
called Non Porus Digital ground, it comes in clear. So I tried it
on some sheets of 75 micron melinex and acetate.
You apply it in one direction first. Let it dry. Then apply it on
another direction. Let it dry. So only 2 coats.
Printed it on a R800, use the matte setting in the driver.
Problems!
The image does get applied on the transparency, though if your
brush strokes are uneven the image degrades in that area.
Plus with my R800 I had an issue with the roller feeder leaving
roller marks on the coat, before the printer head got to it.
Is prone to any slight touching, it smudges the print, no matter
how long you left it to dry! :)
Any dust gets trapped in the coating.
So why would you use this? No idea! Well its more of the fact that
this can't be used in any fashion to give you better or equal
results to normal inkjet transparencies.
There would be other methodologies on brushing better, and perhaps
even fixing the ink so it doesnt get smudged, with a varnish, gel etc.
InkAid also sell a digital ground.
Cheers,
Jacek
|