From: John Campbell (tojohn@texas.net)
Date: 02/12/03-05:49:00 PM Z
Lee,
Power to you. If you are able to maintain the surface quality of those
negatives over time (meaning, long enough to make a few good prints), your
kid gloves are superior to mine.
That "thick pad" is a fine ceramic coating.
I went through a couple of rolls of Pictorico OHP with Cone Peziography B/W
neutral carbon inks in an Epson 3000 and did not have one negative hold up
well enough to use more than once.
Maybe I looked at them wrong. . . I dunno. Probably.
Anyway, whatever is working for you--keep doing it!
Regards,
John
www.photogecko.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "H. Lee Pratt" <squnch@cox.net>
To: <alt-photo-process-l@skyway.usask.ca>
Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2003 12:13 PM
Subject: Re: More digital negatives
> Hello one and all:
>
> I haven't been following the "digital negative" thread in detail; I
> will just reiterate my experience for anyone who is interested:
>
> I have made a very satisfactory digital negative from a 2 1/4 original
> tweaked in Photoshop, inverted to a negative and printed on an Epson
> 3000 using ConeTech quad black pigmented inks on Pictorico OHP film. I
> think it's the Pictorico product that is the secret, as their OHP film
> has a "thick pad" that holds the ink. The only problem I've encountered
> is that the "emulsion" side scratches if you look at it wrong. Handle
> with kid gloves. Pictorico has a web site, and apparently sells direct,
> although I have not yet ordered from them.
>
> Cheers.
>
> Lee
>
>
> On Wednesday, February 12, 2003, at 05:50 AM, Nick Makris wrote:
>
> > Judy, I still have my 1160 with MIS quad inks and 1520 with stock
> > Epson
> > ink. Neither is suitable for the digital negs I want to produce, the
> > former
> > because the ink won't dry and the latter because it's color and as I
> > said, I
> > could live with any density issues. So to answer your question, I'm
> > not
> > making any digital negs of late because the search for the Holy Grail
> > continues.
> >
> > I will however look forward to any news you have in this area.
> >
> > N
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Judy Seigel" <jseigel@panix.com>
> > To: <alt-photo-process-l@skyway.usask.ca>
> > Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2003 12:21 AM
> > Subject: Re: More digital negatives
> >
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, 11 Feb 2003, Nick Makris wrote:
> >>
> >>> image is very delicate, and 2) there is not enough density in the
> >>
> >>
> >> Nick, I've just finished testing a bunch of substrates that if I can
> >> rescue my corrupted file and get the scattered pieces together is
> >> supposed
> >> to be shared with the world... I found that for my purposes neither of
> >> these problems obtains... So I wonder... what ink and what substrate
> >> are
> >> you using... And What density do you need?
> >>
> >> J.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> H. Lee Pratt
> Writer/Photographer
> P O Box 50421
> Santa Barbara, CA 93150
> Mobile: 805-689-3248
> (24/7 Answering Service)
> FAX: 80-565-1670
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : 03/04/03-09:19:09 AM Z CST