PDA

View Full Version : Digital Negatives



Chris Dunham
13-May-2009, 02:13
I recently made my first contact prints from 5x7 negatives and really liked the outcome. Would now like to make much larger prints and I'm trying to sort out the best method of getting the size and retaining the contact print 'smoothness' and sharpness.

Will making large digital negatives (with an Epson 3800) and contact printing on multi grade RC paper provide me with the same feel and sharpness as the 5x7 contact ?

Not sure if I've got this post in the right forum as it's part old/new school.

Chris.

Eirik Berger
13-May-2009, 02:38
I have only made digital negatives on Pictorico OHP for alternative processes (gum prints and carbon transfer) so I have no experience, but I know it has been done and I think there are several opinions if the results can match camera negatives. I wonder if those making digital negatives for silver printing uses a milky white version of the OHP?

In my learning process I bought Ron Reeders book about the subject, and got INVALUABLE help over at the Bostick & Sullivan forum. The nice thing about digital negatives is that you can adapt the negatives to fit a certain process and not the other way around.

My workshop got flooded with waste water both in october last year and now in march, so most of my equipment is destroyed. Hopefully I will be back contact printing and making negatives next winter.

cjbroadbent
13-May-2009, 03:44
I spent a very frustrating 3 months making digital negatives with all the available know-how on curves, inks etc. I now have boxes of negatives which produce Alt contact prints no better than my photocopier - the ultimate test.
The simplest and best by far negatives come straight from 8x10, thought the developer into the printing frame. The only tweak is exposure time + dev. time.

sanking
13-May-2009, 06:29
No, a large digital negative with an Epson 3800 will not provide the same feel and sharpness as a 5X7 contact print from a 5X7 camera negative. But depending on magnification the digital negative might give as much sharpness as a print made by enlargement.

Take this into consideration. A LF negative made in the camera should have detail equivalent to at least 40 lp/mm, and silver papers are capable of showing that much detail with a contact print. However, if you enlarge the 5X7 negative the amount of detail decreases: to 20 lp/mm for a 10X14" print, 10 lp//mm for a 20X28" prnt, and 5 lp/mm for a 40X56" print.

The maximum amount of equivalent detail that can be captured on Pictorioc with output from an Epson 3800 is about 7-10 lp/mm. So at a print size of 20X28" sharpness from the digital negative will be about the same as an enlargment from the original negative.

For alternative printing using art papers the limit to sharpness is normally the paper, not the negative. For example, most of the art papers used for platinum and palladium printing limit resolutin to 10 lp/mm or less. In this case the digital negative is just as good as an original LF negative at any magnification.

Sandy King





Will making large digital negatives (with an Epson 3800) and contact printing on multi grade RC paper provide me with the same feel and sharpness as the 5x7 contact ?

Chris.

Jeremy Moore
13-May-2009, 12:03
I spent a very frustrating 3 months making digital negatives with all the available know-how on curves, inks etc. I now have boxes of negatives which produce Alt contact prints no better than my photocopier - the ultimate test.
The simplest and best by far negatives come straight from 8x10, thought the developer into the printing frame. The only tweak is exposure time + dev. time.

Did you ever take a workshop? Spending 3 months and coming up with naught sounds, to me, like you may have all of the info available, but not how to use it. I would suggest, if you're still interested in the digital negative route, taking a workshop with someone in Europe who currently prints/shows prints made with digital negatives.

Chris Dunham
13-May-2009, 20:37
Thanks to one and all for your input and please keep it coming.

It appears that for alt process printing the digital negative is a worth while option. Which is great as that's a path I want to explore.

Re the printing of 5x7 negatives to a larger size and retaining the most information detail clarity etc - would i get the best results by using an enlarger and silver process or scanning (V700) and printing (Epson 3800)?.

I'm aware that this is a question of potential 'religious' significance to some so if we could restrain ourselves to the practical considerations of quantifiable print quality rather than the less defined aesthetic qualities of the print that would be great :)

Looking forward to the replies.

Chris.

Jeremy Moore
13-May-2009, 21:38
Re the printing of 5x7 negatives to a larger size and retaining the most information detail clarity etc - would i get the best results by using an enlarger and silver process or scanning (V700) and printing (Epson 3800)?.

if we could restrain ourselves to the practical considerations of quantifiable print quality rather than the less defined aesthetic qualities of the print that would be great :)

Chris, are you asking about enlarging on silver vs. straight inkjet printing now?

<rant>There are just too many variables to quantify anything here from what you're asking as so much of getting "the best results" is dependent upon the image/personal vision and the skill level of the technician for each piece of equipment for each step in the process. I think it's more practical to discuss the ramifications of print types/presentations/methods on aesthetic qualities than it is to quantify print quality for another person in a non-laboratory setting.</rant>

Chris Dunham
13-May-2009, 22:21
Chris, are you asking about enlarging on silver vs. straight inkjet printing now?

<rant>There are just too many variables to quantify anything here from what you're asking as so much of getting "the best results" is dependent upon the image/personal vision and the skill level of the technician for each piece of equipment for each step in the process. I think it's more practical to discuss the ramifications of print types/presentations/methods on aesthetic qualities than it is to quantify print quality for another person in a non-laboratory setting.</rant>



Hi Jeremy,

I know it's a very broad question and as such a particularly difficult one. Yes, I think that is pretty much what I'm after - all things being equal (quite agree, there are a huge number of variables but just for the sake of the discussion lets pretend it's possible to level the operator input) would I be in a better position to achieve a printed result similar to a contact print from the enlarger route or via inkjet?

Regards,

Chris.

cjbroadbent
14-May-2009, 00:43
Jeremy, you are right about taking a workshop. Though I think it is worthwhile getting up to speed before taking one.
Chris, I can read a gentle tone transition on two similar prints and compare them but I am not able to read and compare a quantitive comparison.