From: Judy Seigel (jseigel@panix.com)
Date: 02/10/01-12:09:12 AM Z
On Fri, 9 Feb 2001, Andre Fuhrmann wrote:
> After having recommended preparing inkjet negtives on vellum or
> similar tracing paper I must admit that I have been unable over the
> last few days to reproduce the good results obtained in the past. I
> had updated my Photoshop installation and inadvertently lost all my
> "personal curves". After that my inkjet printouts on vellum looked
> just like those reported by other members of the list: smeared and
> blotchy. I know I _can_ twist the curves to get better results -- I
> have done it in the past. But it is apparently not as
> straightforward as I thought; it calls for a lot of experimenting.
>
I wonder if you changed anything ELSE, like ink ???? Or a new haircut? I'm
printing ramps, so *curve* isn't an issue. On the vellum, there are
speckles in MIDTONES. Perhaps nature of your image (lots of detail?)
obscured the fine texture caused by the paper?
> Everything considered I believe that the wet processes for producing
> enlarged negatives (on paper or film) are still the most simple,
> least costly and in the result most satisfying.
Plain paper prints quite smoothly. So there is the option of oiling or
waxing then fastening to clear sheet as P. Fred. suggests for register.
Because wet processing can't fix & tweak what Photoshop can... it's the
last mile to printout is the killer.
Judy
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 03/06/01-04:55:38 PM Z CST