Re: Imaging

Beakman (beakman@netcom.com)
Thu, 19 Sep 1996 06:23:53 -0700 (PDT)

Darryl wrote:

> I've also output to imagesetter film, at 5X7, 8X10, and 11X14 using the
> method suggested by D. Burkholder. The two curves he supplies with his
> book ar designed to be used with either silver or platinum. I've been
> using the silver curve negative with Van Dyke...I love chocolate
> brown...and have had ok success, but will adjust and test as time
> allows.

As many reading this list know, I've been working to perfect the
imagesetter digital negative for my platinum printing. Last night I
printed the first tests with which I am really happy with -- that is, the
test prints are as good, or better, than contact prints from the original
negatives.

Here is the Reader's Digest version of my process:

1. 8x10 original negative scanned on a Howtek D4000 drum scanner at 1333 dpi.

2. Image scaled so that the final image resolution is 600 dpi.

3. Image adjustments made in Photoshop, including some "gentle" sharpening.

4. Apply my "Fabriano" correction curve to the image file. I posted this
curve to this list previously.

5. Output to a Linotronic imagesetter imaging at 5080 dpi. Use a 45
degree, elliptical dot 300 lpi linescreen. Make sure that the *density*
of the 1% step of a step tablet is 3.3.

6. Print on Arches Platine paper which has been double coated using the
formulation below:

for a 5x7 or possibly an 8x10

Standard Pd solution 14 drops
Standard Pt solution 2 drops
Ferric Oxalate solution 16 drops

use this amount for each coat, let each coat dry naturally, for at least
12 hours.

6. Print so that the 100% step is dead black and the 1% step is pure white

7. Develop in standard potassium oxalate solution.

The results of this process yield an incredibly smooth print, posessing a
full tonal range with absolutely no hints of it's digital origins. It's
really quite glorious!

Because I have adjusted the digital negative to work with a
sensitizer and developer which do not contain *any* contrast
agents, my prints are actually smoother now than they were when I was
contact printing original negatives.

>
> I'm also working on a printmaking minor and also using the computer as
> an imaging tool. There the goal is using digital negs with lithography,
> relief, and (maybe) screenprinting. Photopolymer playtes look very
> promising as it would (as Strange Ross has reported) allow photogravure
> printing. But HOLY COW is that an expensive technology. The local
> supplier of plates wants $108.00 for an 16 X 24" plate. And of course,
> that doesn't include the cost of the big (digital) neg.

I have found service bureaus and printing companies who will make
negatives for me for $20 - $25.

Best of luck,

David Fokos