Re: Ultrafine Clear Film and Epson 2200

Hi Don,

No, I would encourage people to test new substrates—especially considering
the cost of materials. That's the only way to improve workflows, by testing
things. My point was that if the substrate/ink combination doesn't function
well together, trying to force it to do so may lead to other problems affecting
the final quality of the print. I hate wasting a print—Palladiium is
expensive and so are the papers—but most of all I hate wasting the time—they only
let me print after all the other patients here in the home have gone to bed.

Yes, these are from Dick's "Turkey Shoot"—he is returning to Turkey in a
month and has to have the prints ready for a show there. They were shot a couple
of months ago in Turkey in 6 cm x 17 cm format, so he needed to use digital
negatives to make the prints.

Mark
Purchase the book @
www.PrecisionDigitalNegatives.com
Credit Card & Paypal now accepted
www.MarkINelsonPhoto.com

In a message dated 10/19/04 10:42:00 PM, dstevenbryant@mindspring.com writes:

> Mark,
>
> >
> I know I must sound like a broken record, or cd as the case may be, but if a
> substrate does not function well with your ink, ie, print smoothly, sharply
> and dry properly in normal use, then you are wasting time and money using
> it.  Substrates are designed work with certain inks and to take certain
> inkloads—or not.
> >
>
> Your point is well intentioned but you can't blame us for trying to utilize
> other substrates. It bothers me a lot to be totally dependent on one
> specific manufacturer for materials needed to produce inkjet negatives. I
> can only hope that Agfa will get off their assets and distribute the Select
> Jet material in the US. Pictorico needs some competition here if for no
> other reason to drive the cost of product down.
>
> > Dick couldn't tell them apart
>
> That's really cool news about Mr. Arentz's prints. I assume he is back home
> now from Turkey and working on a new portfolio.
>
> Don
>
Received on Tue Oct 19 21:59:07 2004