Platine tears and sorrows (fwd)

Beakman (beakman@netcom.com)
Tue, 26 May 1998 05:18:11 -0700 (PDT)

> What is the frequency that printers are finding that platine itself is
> bad?.

I have gone through many hundreds of sheets of Platine and I find that
the "black speck" problem is endemic. It is extremely frustrationg for
me because, for those of you who know my work, of the vast areas of
continous tone in my skies and water. One tiny speck can ruin your whole
day.

Anyway, before coating the Platine I look at it VERY closely under a
bright halogen light. I practically go cross-eyed trying to focus my
eyes on the all-white surface of the paper -- it's like snowblindness. I
look over the whole paper for the slightest speck. I then whole the
paper up to the light and look for *imbedded* specks or dark areas. I
find that about 5%-10% of the paper is good (my sheets end up as 15x20 so
there is a pretty large area that needs to be speck free. Someone making
smaller prints might have a better yield.

Also, someone with a more "typical" photograph -- by that I mean an
average amount of texture, not just huge areas of continous tone -- will
have more luck. If I was printing an image of a forest, for example, the
specks could easily remain hidden. As it is, I sometimes sort the paper
according to where the specks are and then choose to print certain images
on certain pieces so that areas of dark shadow or detail obscure the specks.

> refund of payment on return of the paper? Is somehting being done to
> correct this problem by Arches? Any guarantees if we buy directly from
> Martin Axon?

No, Martin's paper is just the same as anyone elses.

Good luck,
David Fokos