From: Judy Seigel (jseigel@panix.com)
Date: 12/30/02-01:09:11 AM Z
On Mon, 30 Dec 2002, Scott Wainer wrote:
> I did find that with my "bullet-proof" lith negs the exposure times run
> about 30-45 minutes with a bank of 14 BL tubes about 3-4 inches from the
> print frame. I'm currently working on getting thinner lith negs using Liam's
> reversal process which should speed up exposures drastically.
Are those BL tubes as close together as possible? If they're facing up,
have they been dusted/wiped lately?
> About Digital Negs,
> I just gave up on Dan Burkholder's method, after two years of experimenting.
> I reverted to using this process:
I get the impression that the different processes respond to colors
differently. Presumably Dan's orange mix was right for his pt/pd prints,
but spectral density for cyano might be a different shade.
> 1. Scan as grayscale (if from film) or change mode to grayscale (if
> from digital camera).
FWIW, I've found that scanning as color THEN changing to greyscale in
Photoshop gets more info. Or so it seems. NO, I haven't tested this
scientifically -- except I did find that with a problem scan, I did better
that way. It could of course be an idiosyncracy of my Umax, not generic,
but ... if you've got the memory, might be worth a try.
> > 2. Adjust the image using curves/levels til it looks
right. >
> 3. Bump the contrast (subjectively using curves/levels) in the shadows
> and mid-tones for the printing process used.
Have you printed a 13 step guide in the process? Seeing is more helpful I
find than "subjective" without...
4. Invert the image from a positive to a negative.
Are you telling the printer to do emulsion down? Or how you say, flip
horizontal?
> 5. Print as a B&W image (using either black or color inks) on
> transparency film (lie to the printer - tell it i'm printing on photo
> paper).
If you said which printer you're using, I missed it... There's an enormous
difference between black and color on all of them... The black being much
denser. Also great difference between substrates... most of which turn out
to have different "curves." And if you're oiling or waxing, curve
AFTERWARDS.
> Generally, I make 2-3 negs to get a good print, though they don't have the
> same "sharpness" as lith negs.
You're doing emulsion down?
> I have found that 3M and HP transparency films result in "grainy" (gritty
> might be a better word) images. I am going to try some of the Portico
> transparency film and see if that makes a difference. I am also going to try
> printing on photo paper and oiling or waxing to make it more transparent,
> but am concerned about printing the texture of the paper fibers.
I'm going on and on about these points in P-F #8, possibly adding to sum
total of human knowledge, at least for beginners. Definitely to my own
knowledge, with a little help from friends. It's even possible I'll get
the issue out before Easter... meanwhile, why are you using 3M and HP
transparency? The Pictorico, depending on the printer, is tack sharp --
can be too sharp, that is show banding. Anyway.... even as we speak, new
materials emerge.
Judy
>
> Thanks again,
>
> Scott Wainer
> smwbmp@starpower.net
>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : 01/31/03-09:31:26 AM Z CST