[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Re: negatives from deskjet
Sorry, I wasn't' trying to ignore your great tests with Tri-X as a
substrate for inkjet negatives. You got me anxious to try that film now
myself. My tests with (non-hardening fixed) FP4 sheet film in 1998 were
disappointing, but maybe a heavier gelatin coat or better retouching
tooth on the Tri-X is the trick for hanging onto the ink! This is GREAT
About the 256 shades: I suspect your HP printer (though I use an HP laser
for business printing, I've never used one of their inkjets) is using a
stochastic (random dot) scheme for laying ink on paper so the "rules"
about "number of gray values" don't absolutely apply like they do for a
printer that uses a "line screen" approach. I guess the best test for
continuous-tone look and feel would be to print a gray ramp (the kind you
make in Photoshop with the Gradient Tool) that goes from Black to White.
Any problem with posterization should reveal itself in your output.
Please keep the group (and me) appraised of your test results. It's
terrifically exciting to watch as we march ever closer to having enlarged
negatives as close as our desktops!
Jeffrey D. Mathias said...
>Work is ongoing, but I am confident that a decent negative for Pt/Pd may
>be produced. I still have concerns about the number of steps (256 seems
>too few, and it's actually much less than 256). I'd like to use
>16-bit. Does Dan Burkholder have any comments? (either on 256 shades or
>how to print 16-bit.) Can the three colors be used to produce more than