RE: For those who are interested in making digital negatives using pigmented inksets

For what it's worth, I've made 30x40 inch lith negs by enlarging 5x7 inch inkjet positives. But these where used to make gum photos, and we all know how much detail and finesse gum is capable of...

 -----Original Message-----
From: Ender100@aol.com [mailto:Ender100@aol.com]
Sent: Wednesday, December 31, 2003 7:48 PM
To: alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca
Subject: Re: For those who are interested in making digital negatives using pigmented inksets

  Ryuji,

  Since most inkjet negatives are printed at about 360 ppi, I doubt if they would hold up as a negative in an enlarger beyond 2X, if that, depending on how good one's near vision is—in my case...well maybe 3X heheheheh. It would not be that hard to test it with a magnifier held over a standard inkjet print.

  Depending on the inkjet negative and film, and how opaque the dots are (the extreme would be an imagesetter negative) you may have less control with the contrast by varying your chemicals and paper with more opaque dots.

  Mark Nelson
  In a message dated 12/31/03 5:07:33 PM, rs@silvergrain.org writes:

    So my question was how many times of enlargement do you think one can
    make from your Epson 2000P negative on printmaking or watercolor paper
    without noticing the dithering pattern. But I realize that if you are
    limited to non-silver sensitizers and commercial silver material, it's
    kinda hard to predict.

> How tonal values are rendered is another issue but the use of 16 bit
> scans makes that issue moot, in my opinion.

    Also, my guess is that dithering pattern would be less of an issue
    because with silver-gelatin process, the image signal does not need to
    be manipulated to boost contrast before the inkjet negative is made.
    The contrast boost process is done in unquantized, continuous value
    world.
Received on Wed Dec 31 20:12:03 2003