Peter Charles Fredrick (pete@fotem.demon.co.uk)
Fri, 08 Jan 1999 03:35:26 +0000
Judy Wrote
>>I had been wondering if I could really print 3 or 4-color gum to close
enough tolerances so the Photoshop color separation settings would make a
significant difference. This is an entirely different matter from the old
"gum can't do fine detail" myth, which grew in the Petri dish of
cut-and-paste murk. Gum, as I may have said a time or 20, can get
everything in the negative if you let it. <<
Lay this one to rest Judy it is getting distinctly boring, I think we all
agree with you and if we don't we dare not contradict :-)
>>But mixing, coating & developing color from paint, and by hand, rather
than machine, is in my experience unlikely to match the calibrations
assumed in offset printing. Just the difference between measuring a half
gram and a half gallon of color is overriding, and I suspect the
transparency of paint, even "transparent" color, is not like the sinking
in, or actual absorption of one layer by another in the printing ink. With
gum, each layer must be dry & hard before you add the next. Or that's my
surmise, an attempt to explain the differences.<<
You make a strong and valid point here, most of these separation systems
are geared towards offset/ litho photo-mechanical printing, which is a far
cry from your beloved gum. I am convinced we will have to develop our own
parameters for photo/alt, I think this is what Katharine Thayer is trying
to do when she states -:
>>My initial question was:
Knowing that non-postscript printers don't read the Photoshop settings,
I'm curious what happens to the CMYK space as set up in Photoshop when
it encounters a non-postscript printer? Do the printer settings totally
override the Photoshop settings to set up a new CMYK color space? Or
what? Since no one answered my question, I did some experiments and
reported them here in a previous generation of this thread. One of my
findings was that when I changed settings in Photoshop, the changes were
reflected in the separations printed on my inkjet. So no, it's not true,
at least by my own empirical results, that the inkjet printer ignores
the Photoshop settings. > End of quote.<<
I think we are all struggling with this new digital technology so the more
we talk and compare our results, hopefully in time the clearer it will
become.
>>Differences to the eye from the printed separations range from hardly
perceptible to distinctly distinct -- but how they will translate into a
print remains to be seen. Experience suggests that in any event they may
LOOK best without the black, so I guess I'll have to try both versions.<<
IMHO it is very difficult to compare separation printers, if not impossible
at times to gain meaningful information by just eyeballing the negs, only
by printing these little devils can an accurate assessment be made.
>>Pete's advice about using complementary colours helped me out of one
pickle, by the way (thanks!).<<
No thank you ! it is nice to find someone reading and reacting to my
emails,I don't mind Bob Maxey shouting at me or you being very sweet to me,
it is the lurking silence that I find unnerving :->
>>I'd been reproaching myself for timidity in
not doing a black layer... finally in a print with an area imitating a b&w
photo I just laid it on---- yuck! The ugliest thing I ever saw in my
studio. (It was "Neutral Tint" which the book says is a black.) So I began
adding complements, which took the curse off, but it would still seem that
the black should go on first. (This was on top.)<<
Most photomechanical systems , print the black first, however many fine art
printmakers favour printing the black information block last.Here we are up
against the same problem again and again one persons meat is anothers
poison
similar to :-
>>A while back I tried a Mars Black watercolour, which
didn't work with gum, although Mars black was the best black in acrylic,
which I assume is what Peter is using. Oh dear, another variable ...;- ( <<
NO this should be :-)) accurate knowledge is power.
>>I'm still beginning, as noted, now trying separation from a slide on a CD,
but am thinking of getting a slide scanner (so I never have to leave
home!) ... about which I shall ask advice in due course.<<
Get your scanner Judy, it opens a new world, incidentally it is nice to see
you moving away from your one coat gum fixation, and embracing the
wonderful world of colour.
cheers,
pete
http://www.fotem.demon.co.uk/ To visit petes parlour gallery, there is now a
Guestbook !
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Sat Nov 06 1999 - 10:06:40