Re: Negatives

[Sam Wang <stwang@CLEMSON.EDU>]

Candace,

I have found that almost any panchromatic film can be used for 
separation for gum - Super XX was perhaps the best for critical 
mechanical work, but for gum it is overkill. I would suggest trying 
the films available from PhotoWarehouse, which are identical to 
Ilford films and much cheaper. They can cut to almost any size at 
very reasonable prices.

On the other hand, there are all sorts of advantages of going 
digital. For one thing, the printing times are short and sweet, and 
very easy to establish. I have been making prints with transparencies 
made on a cheap HP printer with very good results. Unfortunately the 
size is limited to just 8x10 or so, unless you splice them together. 
You might try using any old inkjet in your office and see if it will 
give you good enough negatives before investing in something 
expensive.

Hope this helps.

Sam Wang

>I recently subscribed to this list and have waded through much of the
>archives before posting.  I also have read the recent discussion of digital
>negatives and I have some questions which I'm sure have been addressed but I
>can not seem to find.
>
>I have been gum printing off and on since college (quite a few years ago).
>Recently I have been working on 3-color.  I had found a handout from a class
>which included a recipe for manual separations using Super XX Pan film.
>That film was no longer made even when I began doing 3 color so I
>substituted T Max 100.  After much experimentation I have been able to make
>separations that are quite suitable for my purposes.  I have been working in
>5X7 and if I liked the image enlarging it to 11X14.  I found out recently
>that in order to get 100 sheets of 5X7 TMX you must order 31-100 sheet
>boxes.  (The same holds true of 11X14.)  Needless to say that is cost
>prohibitive.  I spoke with Kodak and they recommended Ektapan.  It is also
>100 ASA and can be bought a box at a time. Kodak sent me the data sheet and,
>for instance, the development times are significantly different.  I know
>what the negatives should look like for my purposes, (I have no
>densitometer.), but I know I will have to do some fairly major adjusting.  I
>am also afraid Kodak will discontinue that film about the time I get it just
>right.  I don't want to be continually re-inventing the wheel.
>
>I have been reading the posts about digital negatives and am not sure if
>this is the way to go.  I have a Epson 1200 printer.  I have tried  to make
>some negatives from monochrome photos using transparency medium bought at
>Office Depot.  The results have been fairly disappointing.  I have not been
>able to find in the archives what the best material to make enlarged
>negatives.
>
>I have read the posts about the 1160 but can not find what the ultimate
>advantage is to it and the thought of buying yet another piece of hardware
>quite frankly leaves me cold.
>
>Please forgive my ignorance on not being up to speed on this in advance.  I
>have been working here on this little island called Memphis.  I had no idea
>that there were so many others working with gums.  Any help or suggestions
>would be appreciated.
>
>Candace Spearman