From: Bob and Carla (bb333@earthlink.net)
Date: 04/13/03-09:43:10 PM Z
Thanks Sandy, for the generosity of your knowledge based on extensive
testing and solid methodology. It was great to have you in Chicago and
encouraging to see beautiful things in some less common processes...
"il migliore fabbro"
Grazie,
Bob
> Enjoyed the weekend visit with some alt photographers from the Chicago area. Thanks to Michelle Holevar for hosting the activity and to all who showed up.
>
> Took along with me some recent kallitypes made on Pictorico with the Epson 2000P. There have been some reports on this list that it is not possible to print with pigment inks on Pictorico so I brought some examples to show that it sure is possible, at least with the pigment inks of the Epson 2000P. I know this topic has already come up several times in the past but thought it might still hold some interest at this time
>
> So what about quality? Well, really outstanding in my opinion. I am scanning 5X7 negatives (to about 4"X6.8" size) with the Epson 2450 at maximum resolution, then resizing to 360dpi at the print size. I am basically following the instructions in Dan Burkholder's excellent book.
>
> 1. Scan
> 2. Corrections in Photoshop, such as tonal controls with level and curves, cleaning, applying unship mask, etc.
> 3. Resize to 360dpi at the print size and adjust the image on screen to the best possible print.
> 4. Apply one of the platinum curves in the CD that accompanies Dan's book. I actually got better results with this curve than with the one on his website for the Epson 2000P. I found that the platinum curve works perfectly for kallitype and also works very well for carbon printing.
> 5. Invert the image, and adjust orientation by flipping horizontally if necessary.
> 6. Print on Pictorico, but using the glossy photo paper as the medium, with mode set to color.
>
> The result is a negative with a DR of approximately 0.20 to 1.85 (effective UV reading) that prints beautifully with outstanding sharpness. If the printing is on art paper, as we would expect with kallitype and platinum, the paper rather than the negative is the limiting factor in print quality, not the negative. On Stonhenge, for example, there is no visible sign of the random pattern of the printer. The same is true with carbon prints on art paper. On glossy or matte surface photographic papers, however, it is possible to see the pattern of the printer with a 10-15X loupe. The bottom line for me is that if you are printing on art paper with a process such as cyanotype, vandyke, kallitype, or platinum there is nothing to be gained by using a service bureau to print your files as the desktop negative, at least the ones I have done on the Epson 2000P, give you as much quality as the paper can handle. In fact, in comparing contact prints made directly from in-camera 5X7 nega
tives with prints made from negatives on Pictorico printed from scans of the same negative it is pretty clear to me that I can actually get better quality, at the same printing size, with the Pictorico negatives since these can be corrected for tonal values, burned and dodged, and sharpened with the unship mask. I am so convinced of this that I now plan to scan some of my 7X17 negatives and make same size Pictorico negatives after corrections and enhancements.
>
> In addition to the obvious advantages of being able to make tonal corrections and apply unsharp masks, etc. another of the real beauties of printing with different digital negatives that are made following similar procedures is that printing time and contrast is almost identical for every negatives so that once you get the image adjusted as you like on screen printmaking is something of a snap.
>
> One additional comment about Pictorico. I recently acquired a densitometer that reads UV density (at 373nm) and what I have observed is that a UV reading of the clear Pictorico is about log 0.14 more than a similar Visual reading. In an actual reading I measured 0.04 with an X-Rite 811 in Visual mode, and 0.18 with the UV reading. Until someone else proves me wrong I am going to assume that Pictorico adds about one-half of a stop to the basic exposure over what one would see with get with the polyester base we see with most films. That is, a negative on Pictorico with a Visual density range of 0.05 to 1.65 has an actual printing density with UV light of about 0.20 to 1.80.
>
>
> Sandy King
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : 05/01/03-11:59:54 AM Z CST