Richard Sullivan wrote:
> John,
>
> I think just using the black ink is permanent enough. You can use the
> driver screens to just set the cartridge to B&W.
>
> I played with some film yesterday. I found some 8x10 film of unknown brand.
> My idea was to use film that had been fixed and washed and dried. In other
> words a clear film base. Instead I just ran the film unfixed and unexposed
> through my Epson 800. It works fine. BUT... when held up to the light there
> is visible scan lines and grittiness in the image. This was similar to the
> results I got with the clear film base stuff that I bought for ink jet
> printers. I have concluded that film/gel based transparency stuff holds the
> dots real well whereas paper wicks them a little. With paper you get some
> softening of the dots and thus gain some appearance of higher resolution.
> Dave Fokos separates his digi negs with a piece of mylar to get a similar
> effect with his platinum prints. All of this is stuff with these new
> printers is tantalizingly close. I think fer sure, the next generation of
> printers will do it for us. We are hearing about an 8 color 1200 x 1200 dpi
> printers. OOoooohhweee!!!, but then we'll be a wantin the 2400 x2400. won't
> we?
>
> --Dick
>
> At 04:30 PM 12/16/97 -0500, you wrote:
> >I have a question about this subject in general regarding negatives made
> >this way for alt processes. Are we talking about UV exposure thru these
> >negs? If so, my experience with ordinary color images from inkjets is
> >that they fade unbelievably fast when exposed to sunlight. Wouldn't
> >the UV exposures just accelerate this phenomenon??, Wouldn't this
> >fading affect the density and then the exposure thru the negative?? Or
> >is this all about something else that I know nothing about??
> >Thanks
> >
> > John
> >
>
> Bostick & Sullivan
> PO Box 16639, Santa Fe
> NM 87506
> 505-474-0890 FAX 505-474-2857
> <http://www.bostick-sullivan.com>http://www.bostick-sullivan.com