Re: Poor man's negatives
Hi Phritz, Will check avery, I think we have a distributor here (but they're more into labels and such). Thanks for mentioning. BTW, Jacek, Ulano didn't work for me. (I had ordered a sample pack from them...) Phritz, the color (or, more correctly -> the chemical structure of the ink) will change UV opacity. Therefore you only can test this by exposing a 21/31 step tablet to determine the DR the process requires then see if your printer is able to give you paper white with that process. Then you'll know your inks are OK for that particular process. Regards, Loris. 2009/8/11 phritz phantom <phritz-phantom@web.de>: > 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 >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> > >
|