From: Sandy King (sanking@clemson.edu)
Date: 08/29/03-07:08:29 AM Z
Dan Burkholder makes this point as well but I don't agree entirely
with the premise that you can just reprint a digital negative as
necessary when the original one is damaged. You can certainly reprint
the negative but I have my doubts that five years from now you would
be able to reprint a negative that will give you an at an exact or
very close duplicate of an existing print. The negative could be
precisely duplicated so long as you continue to use the exact
equipment (monitor, printer, media) used for the original but
changing any of these components, especially the printer, would make
it virtually impossible to exactly duplicate the original negative.
Sandy King
>Seems it's really easy to reprint a digital negative if necessary.
>Of course this is not possible if you scratch, damage or get solution on a
>traditional negative.
>Pictorico just isn't expensive enough, for me at least, to require it to be
>archival.
>My solution would be to just print another negative and move on.
>Just my thoughts.
>
>Rocky
>Houston, TX
>-----Original Message-----
>From: kateb@paradise.net.nz [mailto:kateb@paradise.net.nz]
>Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2003 7:17 PM
>To: alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca
>Subject: Re: Archival qualities of Pictorico OHP film.
>
>
>Quoting Julian Smart <julian@jsmart.fslife.co.uk>:
>
>> Hello All,
>>
>> for the past two years I have been producing my gum negatives on
>> Pictorico
>> film.
>> Prior to April this year I was printing on an Epson 1290, using
>> standard
>> Epson cartridges. I recently had cause to examine some of my negs. and
>> found
>> them to be faded beyond use. There is a marked colour shift towards the
>> red
>> and a corresponding density decrease, making them now unuseable.
>>
>> I believe this is an issue with all non-archival inks - however, this is
>one
>of the advantages for digital negs - keep the files and you can just
>reprint.
>Much better than scratches on a traditional negative! Anyhow, frequently
>used
>negs should be tested for density from time to time using a step wedge.
>
>I have since changed over to (but not yet tested) Lyson Quad(hex?)
>> black
>> inks. I hope these will be a little more stable and will give me a
>> smoother,
>> more delicate neg than the Epson inks .
>>
>> I would be interested to hear of anyone else's experiences with this
>> film,
>> particularly if anyone has returned to reprint a neg after several
>> months
>> and produced a different result because of a faded neg.
>>
>> I now have a 2100 (2200 in the States) but have yet to make any negs on
>> this
>> as my gum printing season runs from September. Might I expect similar
>> results or will the pigment inks be naturally more archival on this
>> substrate?
>
>sorry, can't help here :)
>
>Kate
>> Many thanks in advance,
>>
>> Julian.
>>
>>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : 09/05/03-09:30:46 AM Z CST