From: Gokhan Erdem (trichromy@yahoo.com)
Date: 09/17/02-07:14:11 AM Z
Hi all, Hi Shannon,
You have written that to get a positive from a
negative is expensive by an image setter. Do they get
the payment by cm2 or inch2? What does a 4*5 inch
cost?
I can give an advice but you must have big darkroom.
There was a wacoom exposer used before the
imagesetters and scanners at the printing houses. They
are still produced in Turkey by order. A 70*100 cm one
costs nearly $ 1000. They may be produced in USA or
where you live. But with this equipment you must find
the films that are graded not lith. If only lith film
can be found or you want to work in colours (Cyan,
Magenta, Yellow) you must use tram. And of course you
must choose the best developer working with the film
you have found. I know it is not easy. Sorry about
English mistakes. I am always confused when thinking
in English.
Best wishes from Turkey
Gokhan
--- Shannon Stoney <sstoney@pdq.net> wrote:
> I am getting ready to make some polymer
> photogravures. At the print
> shop where I'm working, the other people send their
> negatives to an
> imagesetting place to be scanned and then put on
> film. The results
> are very good, but it's rather expensive. I am
> wondering if there is
> a way to do this in a less expensive way. One
> possibility is to scan
> the negatives myself on the flat bed scanner in this
> shop and try to
> print them out on pictorico film or some such. But
> my previous
> attempts to make digital negatives (in this case it
> would be a
> positive) were not good due to banding with the
> printers I had
> available to me.
>
> So I am wondering about making film positives
> directly. If you have
> an 8x10 negative, say, couldn't you contact print it
> onto another
> piece of the same film? Some of the negatives I
> want to use are 4x5;
> I could make smaller prints of those, or possibly
> get access to an
> enlarger and enlarge them onto film. But let's say
> you're contact
> printing an 8x10 negative to make a film positive.
> If you use another
> sheet of Tri X for the positive, it will be very
> fast, so the
> exposure will have to be very fast. If you are
> exposing with a 7 1/2
> watt lightbulb, I think it would be hard to get the
> exposure short
> enough. Am I correct to worry about this?
>
> Anyway, I'm interested in hearing about how other
> people resolved
> this. In a way, it's just an issue of making a copy
> negative, or an
> enlarged negative, except that it's a positive; but
> then also there's
> the fact that the photopolymer plates probably have
> different curves
> from other processes, and I don't know yet what
> they are.
>
> --shannon
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes
http://finance.yahoo.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : 10/01/02-03:47:09 PM Z CST