From: Scott Wainer (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: 12/30/02-05:09:45 PM Z
Thanks for the comments; they brought up some interesting points.
About the BL bulbs -
I just replaced all 14 about a week ago (the old ones were about a year
old - past their prime) and made sure that they were clean when I put them
in. As for spacing, I built an under-the-counter unit that just barely takes
a 20x24 print frame with the bulbs approximately 1/2 inch apart and 3 inches
from the print frame (to get the fastest prints possible). My next project
is to design a HID unit that contains four 1000 watt bulbs for even faster
exposures but the need for heat removal is making it slow going.
For the digital negatives -
I tried both b&w and spectral (4 or 5 different colors) negs without
All images are from a Nikon Coolpix 4500, 35mm scanned on a Canon FS4000US
(4000 dpi), or 4x5 scanned on a Microtek ScanMaker 4900 (4800 dpi). FWIW, my
PC has a 1.8 gig AMD processor, 512 megs of ram, and is running Win98SE
(Mellinium sucks - kept crashing when I used PS). When scanning, I have
tried both 8 and 14 bit monochrome and up to 42 bit for color (average scan
time for the Canon is 35 minutes vs. 3-4 minutes for monochrome) but i'll be
darned if I can see much difference once they are lowered to 8 bit
gray-scale for printing. I manipulate them in PS 6 and print on a Epson 1280
using the standard Epson color and black inks. Yes, all negs are flipped
horizontally and exposed ink to emulsion. I haven't used a test strip; I
adjust the neg and processing steps til I get the image I want. As for the
trans. material, I had it laying around (used it for Cliche-verres) and just
decided to try it. That could be one of the problems. Until I get a grip on
the problems i'm going to continue working with Liam's lith reversal process
for film negs and print my digital images as poritives on photo papers.
I'm looking into getting another printer (2000 series?) that I can designate
for monochrome only and keep the 1280 for color work. I'd be interested in
knowing what everyone thinks about the Luminos Lumijet systems which i've
been looking into recently.
PF #8 -
I'm looking forward to the next issue. With everything i've been hearing
about being in it, it sounds like it's going to cover everything; possibly
more than 52 pages?
Thanks again for the comments; their always welcome.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Judy Seigel" <email@example.com>
Sent: Monday, December 30, 2002 2:09 AM
Subject: Re: Cyan and Digital Negs
> On Mon, 30 Dec 2002, Scott Wainer wrote:
> > I did find that with my "bullet-proof" lith negs the exposure times run
> > about 30-45 minutes with a bank of 14 BL tubes about 3-4 inches from the
> > print frame. I'm currently working on getting thinner lith negs using
> > reversal process which should speed up exposures drastically.
> Are those BL tubes as close together as possible? If they're facing up,
> have they been dusted/wiped lately?
> > About Digital Negs,
> > I just gave up on Dan Burkholder's method, after two years of
> > I reverted to using this process:
> I get the impression that the different processes respond to colors
> differently. Presumably Dan's orange mix was right for his pt/pd prints,
> but spectral density for cyano might be a different shade.
> > 1. Scan as grayscale (if from film) or change mode to grayscale (if
> > from digital camera).
> FWIW, I've found that scanning as color THEN changing to greyscale in
> Photoshop gets more info. Or so it seems. NO, I haven't tested this
> scientifically -- except I did find that with a problem scan, I did better
> that way. It could of course be an idiosyncracy of my Umax, not generic,
> but ... if you've got the memory, might be worth a try.
> > > 2. Adjust the image using curves/levels til it looks
> right. >
> > 3. Bump the contrast (subjectively using curves/levels) in the
> > and mid-tones for the printing process used.
> Have you printed a 13 step guide in the process? Seeing is more helpful I
> find than "subjective" without...
> 4. Invert the image from a positive to a negative.
> Are you telling the printer to do emulsion down? Or how you say, flip
> > 5. Print as a B&W image (using either black or color inks) on
> > transparency film (lie to the printer - tell it i'm printing on photo
> > paper).
> If you said which printer you're using, I missed it... There's an enormous
> difference between black and color on all of them... The black being much
> denser. Also great difference between substrates... most of which turn out
> to have different "curves." And if you're oiling or waxing, curve
> > Generally, I make 2-3 negs to get a good print, though they don't have
> > same "sharpness" as lith negs.
> You're doing emulsion down?
> > I have found that 3M and HP transparency films result in "grainy"
> > might be a better word) images. I am going to try some of the Portico
> > transparency film and see if that makes a difference. I am also going to
> > printing on photo paper and oiling or waxing to make it more
> > but am concerned about printing the texture of the paper fibers.
> I'm going on and on about these points in P-F #8, possibly adding to sum
> total of human knowledge, at least for beginners. Definitely to my own
> knowledge, with a little help from friends. It's even possible I'll get
> the issue out before Easter... meanwhile, why are you using 3M and HP
> transparency? The Pictorico, depending on the printer, is tack sharp --
> can be too sharp, that is show banding. Anyway.... even as we speak, new
> materials emerge.
> > Thanks again,
> > Scott Wainer
> > firstname.lastname@example.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : 01/31/03-09:31:26 AM Z CST