From: Michael Healy (mjhealy@kcnet.com)
Date: 01/27/03-02:05:07 PM Z
----- Original Message -----
From: "H. Lee Pratt" <squnch@cox.net>
To: <alt-photo-process-l@skyway.usask.ca>
Sent: Monday, January 27, 2003 11:25 AM
Subject: Re: introduction and request for info on digital negatives
<snip>
Second: I too have an Epson 3000, which I have dedicated to b&W work,
using the PiezographyBW drivers and inks. My understanding at this
point is that you only need a "curve" if you are making a contact
negative through a service bureau = using lithographic film. I doubt
you will need any curve to make a desktop negative on your Epson, as
you can simply invert your final image to a negative and print it to
your 3000 on Pictorico OHP film. (Epson transparency film does not
work, but the Pictorico product does.) If your positive looks good on
the screen, the negative will probably print well on #2 paper.
<snip>
I am inclinded to disagree with you about curves on desktop negs. I also am
new to making my own desktop negs, but here's what I find: the same neg does
NOT give the same printing outcome with argyrotype that it gives me with
cyanotype. Different processes, different papers, so maybe it should be
self-evident. Definitely not the same results at all.
What I did when I first started this homebrew negative stuff was to input
(in Photoshop) every one of Palmer's 14 "test correction curves" (Barnier,
p. 233). Then I applied every one to a different copy of Burkholder's
digital step tab. Finally I copied all of these onto a single 8x10 PS file,
which I printed on acetate. If you do that, and print with this, I think
you're going to be in for a surprise. It was a really tedious project, but
there is no better argument for the need of curves on your desktop negs.
Mike
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : 02/21/03-10:44:17 AM Z CST