Re: Ultrafine Clear Film and Epson 2200

Great minds think alike, Don. I got your letter as I was testing Marek's
curve. This is what I found:

Marek's workflow:
(Marek's words verbatim, hope it's ok to quote you, Marek)
"I adjust the picture, go to grayscale, invert and apply the curve to the
negative. My curve is 1-100 units. Here are some other details. The
negative has a slight greenish cast to it. Document : gray gamma 1.8
Printer profile: same
Printer details:
Glossy photo paper( I used velvet fine art paper before and it printed
purple cast negative)
ICM profile, no color adjustment
highg speed unchecked, black only unchecked (prits all colors)
photo 1440 dpi printing
edge smooting checked (I don't know what that does if anything)
If the rollers are raised, the PW transparency should come out somewat
tacky (I am able to smear the ink with my finger as it comes out), but
otherwise looking good and without roller marks that ruined my first
trials. It should dry out in a couple of hours. I made a test palladium
print today on Pictorico and PW and I can not tell the difference."

I did exactly as Marek does, using his curve which I received today and sure
enough, on the darkest part of the negative, the roller marks smeared the
ink. The ink did not smear on lighter parts of the neg, just where the
density was greatest. The ink was tacky to the touch, but not in the
lighter/less dense parts.

Then, I went back and did everything Marek said, above, again with his pt/pd
curve, except I chose "black ink only", and presto, no smear. Thus, there
is something in the color part of the equation in combination with density
that screws things up.

So, in my mind, if you need to do pt/pd prints with colored inks, Photo
Warehouse is not suitable unless you remove the wheels. If you can get by
with black ink only, then it is fine. With gum printing, it works just
fine. OH, I did not try the 2880 speed. Marek, "waiting a couple hours for
the neg to dry" is hardly something my workflow allows; I'm way too hasty.

Interestingly, Marek's curve produces a bluish, flatter/thinner looking
negative than black ink only, which is plenty dense. In other words, my gum
negs are **not** thin. But I'm sure what this boils down to is Mark Nelson's
indication that different ink colors have different UV blocking capabilities
and hence the "apparent" density of the neg doesn't tell the whole story,
right Mark? In other words, Marek's apparent thin/flat neg for pt/pd isn't
so.

Sandy and Don, is it possible you could both print a side by side black ink
only neg with a colored ink only neg and see what kind of print both produce
in pt/pd or kallitype? That would be really interesting, and it'll be a
cold day in hell before I get to pt/pd print anytime soon.

Thanks, you guys, for testing this.
Chris

----- Original Message -----
From: "Don Bryant" <dstevenbryant@mindspring.com>
To: <alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca>
Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2004 9:27 PM
Subject: Ultrafine Clear Film and Epson 2200

>I just thought I would report to the list my results of testing Ultrafine
> Clear Film (thanks to Christina Anderson who gave me six sheets to
> evaluate)
> and the Epson 2200.
>
> This afternoon I printed Mark Nelson's Printer Evaluation Palette using
> the
> Premium Luster media setting printed at 1440 DPI. Unfortunately I had exit
> roller marks show up on the film just as others have reported.
> Additionally
> after 4 hours of drying the inks still can be smudged and the dreaded
> pizza
> wheel tracks are there too.
>
> I know someone posted a link showing a method for lifting the rollers up
> off
> of the substrate. Can someone point me to that web page again? I think
> that
> this substrate is usable, the PEP is very sharp and with an over night
> drying time the ink smudging could be eliminated. Of course the pizza
> wheel
> tracks may be a problem that can't be fixed.
>
> The first sheet got chewed up as it fed underneath the print head; on the
> second sheet I used a piece of inkjet paper to support the film which then
> did feed properly.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Don Bryant
>
>
>
>
>
Received on Tue Oct 19 20:37:06 2004