U of S | Mailing List Archive | alt-photo-process-l | Re: Poor man's negatives

Re: Poor man's negatives



hi,
i'm using overhead transparencies as well. my brand is: avery "overhead transparencies" 2502 (~$25 for a box of 50 sheets). they are doing the job... i suppose, i've never using anything but these and my canon printer.
lately, i got a little concerned, because the maximum density i can achieve with this combination (reading taken with the white channel of my color-densitometer) is between 1.00 and 1.10. (i don't have a uv-densitometer, but i could make measurements from the color-channels, if those were more significant).
is a maximum gradient of 1.00 too little? i've printed vandyke and cyanos quite well... at least to my eyes. gum and carbon too, but these processes allow for more contrast control.

phritz



Jacek Gonsalves schrieb:
Hi Loris,
I've never used Pictorico, as here in Australia its hard to come by and too expensive to import. There is Folex and Ulano you can try, all European brands from what I gather. Though i'm not certain if the HP inks will work with the transparency brand?
On a side not I am thinking of getting a Vivera ink, the Z3100 PK cartridge and using Paul Roark method of diluting the ink into different 5 different ink shades. Then using that ink in the R1800 and see if I can get a good enough graduation on film negs as well as inkjet prints.

One thing I've noticed is that matte inks dont work on transparency medium so well, as some are classed as a glossy substrate. On the other hand the Photo Black or PK inks work well on the transparency classed as glossy.

Thanks for your previous posts, I've seen the Meyer coating rod and there is a nifty website http://site.booksmartstudio.com/ which sells just that item.
Long link! --->

http://www.booksmartstudio.com/store/inkaid-inkjet-precoatings-250/coating-rods-stainless-steel-5-8-diameter-25-inch-length-1014.html

I wonder if coating rods would help us with our alternative process? Gum, Cyanotypes?
Cheers
Jacek



Quoting Loris Medici <mail@loris.medici.name>:

Indeed there are several cheap inkjet transparency products in the shelves.
For instance I was using Photowarehouse Ultrafine Crystal Clear OHP when I
had an Epson 1290 (dye inks!). Price for one 11x17" sheet was USD 0.75 which
is not too bad. Unfortunately, most of those cheap transparencies won't work
well with most printers with pigmented inks; I can't use Ultrafine with the
inks of my current HP9180 anymore. (Can't say something about R800's inks
BTW.) Therefore, your advice (even if being good) may not apply to all...

Can anyone name cheaper (than Pictorico!) transparency brands which will
work with HP9180 (Vivera inks) and will give equivalent quality w/o much
hassle?

Thanks,
Loris.


-----Original Message-----
From: Katharine Thayer [mailto:kthayer@pacifier.com]
Sent: Saturday, August 08, 2009 3:17 PM
To: alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca
Subject: 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