From: Nick Makris (nick@mcn.org)
Date: 04/04/02-03:48:54 PM Z
Dave, I could go on forever on the subject of digital negs from inkjet
printers. I'm zeroing in on it and will post my results when complete
(whatever that means).
I have been experimenting (here I go) with various substrates and
inks/methods/workflows/curves/actions and to date, only the Pictorico film
seems like the way to go. It doesn't accept pigment based inks and I have
just yesterday changed to a Quad Black dye based ink with archival qualities
(whatever that means). I am collaborating with at least two others from
this list and the results, as I said, will be posted.
As for the Lightjet, I have to assume that if I were to once again start
making negs/images for the lightjet, I would do much better this time
around. I have no plans to do so, as I am confident that a quality digital
neg with at least 19-20 steps is just around the corner. Besides, I have a
significant investment in this digital stuff.
Nick
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dave Orndorf" <dorndorf@nconnect.net>
To: <alt-photo-process-l@skyway.usask.ca>
Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2002 5:03 AM
Subject: Re: Lightjet Duraclear negs
> Nick,
> Thanks so much for the response! You are the only one who has responded
> which surprises me. It is a bit expensive, but I have been so disappointed
> with the whole Burkholder method (as far as the tonal quality) that I feel
> this is the only Digital solution (this week). Did you LOVE the quality
> that you achieved from the lightjet or was it just an acceptable way to
> enlarge your negs outside of the darkroom? How much fiddling did you have
> to do before you nailed it? Did you invert everything in PhotoShop, or did
> the lightjet do that for you?
> The current price I am getting for a 30x30 output is $150 - I will be
> working in a 14x14 print size so that would make each neg $37.50.
>
> Thanks again for taking the time to respond, I truly appreciate it.
> Dave Orndorf
>
>
> > From: Nick Makris <nick@mcn.org>
> > Reply-To: alt-photo-process-l@skyway.usask.ca
> > Date: Thu, 04 Apr 2002 09:40:21 -0800
> > To: alt-photo-process-l@skyway.usask.ca
> > Subject: Re: Lightjet Duraclear negs
> >
> > Dave, I can't recall anyone else here on this list as having posted
about
> > success with Lightjet negs. The only digital negs I have had absolute
> > success with (Pt/Pd) is the Lightjet variety - they are quite pricey.
The
> > company I have been using was in Las Vegas and is no longer in business.
> >
> > I can only offer that I did nothing special to prepare my images for the
> > Lightjet per se, except as follows:
> >
> > I made sure that in grayscale mode, my monitor would properly
> > differentiate between 21 steps.
> > I converted the image into grayscale mode and then adjusted the
> > contrast/levels to suit visual tatse.
> > I ganged the images into one large image and output as a TIFF.
> >
> > Many thanks,
> >
> > Nick
> >
> > BTW, there is a basic lesson in the above procedure - BE SURE YOUR
MONITOR
> > SHOWS 21 STEPS.....
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Dave Orndorf" <dorndorf@nconnect.net>
> > To: <alt-photo-process-l@skyway.usask.ca>
> > Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 3:11 AM
> > Subject: Lightjet Duraclear negs
> >
> >
> >> Is anyone using the lightjet for enlarged negs? I looked in the
archives
> > and
> >> could find nothing. I am thinking of outputting the enlarged negs on to
> > the
> >> Duraclear material. If anyone has any experience good or bad could they
> >> please comment.
> >> Thanks
> >> Dave Orndorf
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 05/01/02-11:43:28 AM Z CST