From: Julian Smart (julian@jsmart.fslife.co.uk)
Date: 08/30/03-02:50:25 AM Z
Sandy, I totally agree with you.
I have had experiences reprinting older negatives where it seems to me the
actual substrate has changed. Pictorico is a complex material produced in
batches just like any other film and thus has a million sets of variables in
it's manufacture.
Another point to bear in mind when suggesting that it is easy to just print
another neg. is that the cost of all the materials involved is so much
greater here in the UK. We have to pay around £3.20 per A3 sheet of
Pictorico plus the cost of the ink at around £1.20 per print. So £4.50 as a
starting point does get a little pricy for a series of negs. :~(
Julian.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sandy King" <sanking@clemson.edu>
To: <alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca>
Sent: Friday, August 29, 2003 2:08 PM
Subject: RE: Archival qualities of Pictorico OHP film.
> 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