Re: Archival qualities of Pictorico OHP film.

About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view Attachment view

From: Hamish Stewart (hamish.stewart@gumphoto.demon.co.uk)
Date: 09/01/03-11:15:49 AM Z


On 30/8/03 10:12, "Julian Smart" <julian@jsmart.fslife.co.uk> wrote:

Julian,

I haven't used the negs to print in the darkroom. From experimenting with a
few different curves and tweaks I discovered that the silver curve worked
best for me. Judging by the way this curve pushes tonality toward the
mid-tones I presumed it would work well with gum. I should perhaps point out
that my Metal Halide lights are quite contrasty so I seek to produce quite
flat negatives. Different lighting set-ups might need a different approach.

What I like with the Lyson inks is that I get a nice neutral neg but with
the density I need for gum printing. And I don't find the results grainy
either. Sam Wang has a curve for gum that might suit your needs.

Best Regards

Hamish

> Hamish,
>
> Thanks for the reply and nice to hear from you again.
>
> I decided to set up my 1290 with the Lyson inks exclusively for making negs.
> though I haven't yet made any with it. I have made some b+w prints on
> Permajet portrait which look fine but don't come close to the quality
> available from darkroom made prints. This is probably down to the original
> files (4M.pix) so I will have to reserve judgement until I can print some of
> our pro-cam (volare) files.
>
> For my gum negs. I am hoping that I can get a much smoother tonality and a
> far less grainy result than I was getting with the standard ink black
> setting (the colour setting laid down too much ink and had too great a
> clour shift over the scale).
>
> Just out of curiosity, Hamish, have you tried printing the negs. you
> produced using the silver curve in the darkroom?
>
> Regards,
>
> Julian,
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Hamish Stewart" <hamish.stewart@gumphoto.demon.co.uk>
> To: "Alt Photo List" <alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca>
> Sent: Friday, August 29, 2003 4:51 PM
> Subject: Re: Archival qualities of Pictorico OHP film.
>
>
>> On 28/8/03 23:33, "Julian Smart" <julian@jsmart.fslife.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Julian,
>>
>> I have been using the Lyson quad black inks for about 12 months with
>> Pictorico and I am happy with the results for gum printing. I use an Epson
>> 1290 and I have never used the Epson inks, just the Lyson. I don't detect
>> any problems with fading so far so I imagine you would get good use out of
>> your negs with this set up.
>>
>> One thing that took some time to get used to however was the way in which
>> pigment inks behave which is rather different to silver negs. In my
>> experience I found that too much pigment density blocks UV more than a
>> similar density in silver. A little experimentation revealed a suitable
>> negative standard for my lights and working method. I found that the
> silver
>> curve for pictorico and the 1290 on Dan's site worked a treat.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Hamish
>>
>>
>>> 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 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?
>>>
>>> Many thanks in advance,
>>>
>>> Julian.
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>


About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view Attachment view

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : 10/01/03-03:08:59 PM Z CST