valerie_matthews@notes.teradyne.com
Date: 02/27/01-01:31:24 PM Z
Amazon has it for less than $10. Maybe the shipping is a bit cheaper?
Paul Egan <paulegan@home.com> on 02/27/2001 02:18:43 PM
Please respond to alt-photo-process-l@skyway.usask.ca
To: alt-photo-process-l@skyway.usask.ca
cc:
Subject: Re: desktop negatives
Does anyone know how the Burlington compares to the Pictorico. The
Burlington appears to be available in Canada but not the Pictorico. Of
course I can order direct from Pictorico but I have difficulty with the $16
UPS charge on $19 worth of product.
Thanks,
Paul Egan.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kenneth Carney" <kcarney@mmcable.com>
To: <alt-photo-process-l@skyway.usask.ca>
Sent: Friday, January 26, 2001 5:23 PM
Subject: Re: desktop negatives
> I've had pretty good results (at least as good as it's probably going to
get
> with inkjet) with Burlington TruColor clear polyester film.
> www.pariscorp.com. I'll try the cornstarch, since the transparencies
seem
> never to dry completely (Epson 1270).
>
> Regards,
>
> --Ken Carney
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Sarah Van Keuren <svk@steuber.com>
> To: <alt-photo-process-l@skyway.usask.ca>
> Sent: Friday, January 26, 2001 9:00 AM
> Subject: desktop negatives
>
>
>
> > But what, pray tell, are you printing those desktop negatives on? I've
> > just gotten an inkjet running (also disappearing, VERY tricky
connection,
> > and "I" is lie, installation courtesy of a friend), but preliminary
tests
> > have not as yet provided useful negative material... I hadn't wanted to
> > wax plain paper -- looking for something more translucent, even
> > transparent, because I re-register on light table. The waxed paper
exposes
> > gum well and quickly, but too opaque visually -- almost impossible to
see
> > through.
> >
> > Judy
>
> Judy, I am printing desktop negatives on inkjet acetate at 1440dpi, using
an
> Epson 1200 printer. I use Dan Burkholder's colorized grayscale method to
get
> a negative with orange-black tones.* Even after drying such an inkjet
> negative overnight it can remain tacky and if sandwiched against clear
> acetate can make blobby patterns that print. I don't dare print with the
> inkjet surface directly against my cyanotype/gum because of my experience
> with leaving an inkjet negative face down overnight against a plain sheet
of
> BFK and finding that when I coated that sheet with cyanotype solution the
> next day a ghostly image appeared due to variable absorbancy imparted by
the
> inkjet negative. Printing with the inkjet image against the glass of the
> contact frame resulted in ink adhering to it. So my solution is to
sprinkle
> corn starch on the inkjet image and gently work it in with a cotton swab.
> Then I sandwich it against clear acetate and contact print.
>
> Sarah
>
> *I tried to produce such a negative on Ernestine Ruben's Epson 2000 that
has
> archival inks and found that it smeared as it emerged < whatever propels
it
> out of the printer made a mess of the image. I imagine this is because
> archival inks don't dry as fast and at 1440dpi I was exceeding the 360dpi
> that is recommended for inkjet acetate.
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 03/06/01-04:55:40 PM Z CST