Re: km73 plate with finer stochastic screen
That would be, "pop", not "pope". Yet both are, as has been
demonstrated on numerous occasions, quite fallible.
Jon Lybrook wrote:
Indeed! Astute observations on all accounts! ;-)
Wiping technique can affect highlights. In this case the print was on
Rives BFK - Bright White, so the paper base is about as white as white
can be. Plate tone is a common 'feature' with this process, however,
which can add a tinge of dinginess (a desirable quality to some when
executed properly!). The fact that I'm transposing from a print will
degrade the 'pop' found in the original a little bit, as with any
transfer process. Scanners are also quite unforgiving. The print in
front of me seems to be quite poppy, but I agree the pope could be,
and I expect, can be better.
Imagesetter transparencies rock if you can get 'em!
Loris Medici wrote:
Nice print, lovely couple! :)
In my monitor, the polymer print lacks the specular highlights -> A
scanning artifact? Because of paper base? ... or ... Is this just normal
I wish printing presses were not that much expensive. I found a dealer
that stocks KM73 plates in Istanbul, now I have to find a school w/ a
printing press... Considering the cheap price for imagesetter negatives
here, I will probably try photopolymer process later (for making
From: Jon Lybrook [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] Sent: Wednesday, April
11, 2007 9:25 AM
Subject: km73 plate with finer stochastic screen
Here's a scan of an intaglio print I made today using the 1800 dpi
stochastic screen, side-by-side with a scan of the original silver
print. This is using the 2nd iteration of the compensation curve
I've been developing for my workflow with the 7800. Not without room
for improvement, but getting close! No adjustments were made to the
16bit RGB scan of the intaglio print, other than converting it to
jpg. Auto-adjust was turned off in the scanner settings.
Please let me know what you think, and if you have any questions not
already addressed in my on-line procedure.