Re: desktop negatives, acetate vs paper

Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

From: Sarah Van Keuren (svk@steuber.com)
Date: 01/26/01-08:26:19 PM Z


>>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.
>
> In the book, Dan also suggests using paper to avoid the tackiness problem.
> I assume you've tried that but decided that acetate is better than paper
> for some reason. I wonder if you could elaborate on your preference for
> acetate.
>
> --shannon

Initially I made paper and acetate negatives, and printed the same scanned
pinhole fragment from all of them. One paper negative was transparentized
with oil, one was not. Like Judy, I missed being able to register the paper
negatives by eye but I can imagine relying on registration marks in the
arrangement Judy suggests, I suppose. Also I thought that I missed a
complete range of blue to its DMax with the paper negatives, perhaps due to
inadequate exposure. However, I have not yet tried the paper negatives with
gum which has a much shorter tonal range to begin with and doesn't take as
long to expose as cyanotype. Another reason I've used acetate is that I've
been making digital masks that I sandwich with my original pinhole negative
and it is easier to register by eye than to attach the pinhole negative to
an inch of extra material all the way around.

The more I think about it, the more I realize that I haven't given paper
negatives enough of a chance. Certainly they are much less expensive! This
spring I will work with them and let you know how I do. Maybe you can let me
know your results.

Sarah


Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 02/05/01-11:45:23 AM Z CST