Digital Negatives

Questions and answers about developing film, enlarging and making your own prints. Also, topics on scanning your negatives, transparencies and photos.
Post Reply
titrisol
Enthusiast
Enthusiast
Posts: 278
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2014 9:14 am
x 20
x 9
Contact:

Digital Negatives

Post by titrisol » Wed Nov 27, 2019 10:08 am

Thanks to Brazile for his comment in my thread a few weeks ago I began looking into printing those old photos into cyanotypes
It seems to me that the most important step is making digital negatives that match the tonal range of the final medium

I found these posts about it:
https://www.alternativephotography.com/ ... ives-gimp/
https://www.mikeware.co.uk/downloads/DiginegWork.pdf

But I still would like to know how are you guys doing this?
How to match the tonal ranges of the inkjet to the final print?
Wouldnt it be a lot of nano-dots in patterns that look like gray?

How if we use color in the negatives to block UV light more efficiently?
If you can't fix it with a hammer... you got an electrical problem
even duct tape can't fix stupid.... but it can muffle it (SilentObserver)
My Flickr -ipernity
Thanks CE Nelson ;)

Brazile
Enthusiast
Enthusiast
Posts: 376
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2014 7:22 am
x 3
x 4
Contact:

Re: Digital Negatives

Post by Brazile » Thu Nov 28, 2019 7:48 am

See my post in your other thread for my answer to most of these questions. As to "nano-dots", no, the resolution of modern inkjet printers is sufficiently fine that once passed through the analog process of your choice, the dots are not really visible any longer. That said, I can see how applying the necessary curve to the image can yield some odd results that might result in banding, but in practice I haven't had a problem with this...so far.

As mentioned elsewhere, you can certainly discover which color in your inkset (I have an Epson 2880 printer, which uses the "Ultrachrome K3" inkset, I believe) to block UV, but it isn't necessary to start.

Robert

Brazile
Enthusiast
Enthusiast
Posts: 376
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2014 7:22 am
x 3
x 4
Contact:

Re: Digital Negatives

Post by Brazile » Thu Nov 28, 2019 7:55 am

Just looked at Mike Ware's notes. The man certainly knows what he's talking about, so I'm sure his method works. Interesting that he finds that an overall gamma correction (as opposed to calculating a specific curve from what amounts to simple densitometry) works for the purpose well enough, after having spent more time than I figuring out max ink.

I will note, though, that the process I use does not involve a 100-step wedge, but one of only 10 or 12 steps (can't recall just this moment) and it doesn't take that long to do. But Dr. Ware's method is also pretty simple and would be worth trying, and might yield better results.

Robert

titrisol
Enthusiast
Enthusiast
Posts: 278
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2014 9:14 am
x 20
x 9
Contact:

Re: Digital Negatives

Post by titrisol » Fri Nov 29, 2019 10:43 am

I went with Dr Ware's process, I'm using some Photographers Forulary liquid cyano... as I found a kit on sale
I printed a 31 step tablet and seems to me that I have to make the negatives with a Gamma of 1.8 - 2.0 so as to print in Grade 0 paper (soft)
The highlights are extended, and the shadows tend to compress

I made a 1st batch of 6 paper sheets on Canson water paper and results are decent.
Last night I prepared a 2nd batch; adding K-Drichromate to see if there is any difference
If you can't fix it with a hammer... you got an electrical problem
even duct tape can't fix stupid.... but it can muffle it (SilentObserver)
My Flickr -ipernity
Thanks CE Nelson ;)

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest