new digital neg system from cone

[WalkerBlackwell]

I guess the most important part of PiezoDN is that the tools included enable you to linearize a .quad directly from 129 printed patches using Roy Harrington's QTR-Linearize-Quad. This is a significant improvement over 51 steps + guessing in the dark (or 16 steps in a photoshop adjustment curve)

The error correction tool is built to correct for darkroom printed patches where light fall-off or brush-marks may be present.

[Michael Mutmansky]

How many of those are duplicate patches?

[Greg]

I have been making digital negatives for the past few years per Dan Burkholder's system as described in his book: The New Inkjet Negative Companion. Truly 90% successful with first "final prints". In the world of Pl/Pt printing... cost effective to almost the nth degree. For me: "If it's working and not broken, why change?"

[Michael Rosenberg]

Bob,

The negatives with my system look like a silver gelatin negative, with smooth transitions between tones, little to no grain (on the silver gelatin print), and very sharp. Sandy King visited me a couple of years ago and saw the negatives and the resulting prints. He has since adapted part of my method for carbon print negatives. My system builds on Ron Reeders method for alt pritns using QTR. The process is linear, so the higher density of a silver gelatin negative is the densest part of the negative; as you can see from the image of the ink curves they sort of look like a film density plot. My method differs from all other methods as it introduces a linearized curve in the ink descriptions,, rather than trying to impose a linearization on top of all the inks (see insert picture and my monograph). This is clearer when you look at the top part of the image showing the QTR Gui ink settings. Thus, all but one ink overlays each other.

LC and C are not used because silver gelatin paper does not respond to cyan/ink color. Because the inks overlap the ratio of magenta and yellow inks affects local contrast. Overlap of the inks also lays down more ink for blocking light and reducing grain. I use the Epson 4880 and 7880 printers with the Epson inks. One other big difference is the negative media; I found transparency and white film do not give very good results, as I explain in my monograph. Instead I have found that glossy print paper gives excellent results - less grain and very sharp. Not to mention it is much cheaper!

Several people who have tried my system have given me feedback that the two curves and profiles I supplied worked extremely well, and they did not need to change anything.

You can download the monograph from my web site, and if you send me your e-mail I will send you the files (My web host does not allow them to be downloaded from my site).

I would be interested in a ink system that has the same blocking power and sharpness as silver film, I am producing enlarged contact film for silver with very
good results, I use a Durst Lambda with 20 inch and 30 inch Rollie ortho 25 developed in HC110. We are able to make up to 28 inch x 40 inch live area on film.
I also make inkjet negs but have not seen great results to silver gelatin - basically a lot of light bleed through the ink.

We are using Ron Reeders QTR system on a Epson 7800- though great for alternative rag prints , not so great for silver contact.

Michael - could you describe how your system is different to allow better blocking power using ink sets and pictorico?

[Denny]

I have been making digital negatives for the past few years per Dan Burkholder's system as described in his book: The New Inkjet Negative Companion. Truly 90% successful with first "final prints". In the world of Pl/Pt printing... cost effective to almost the nth degree. For me: "If it's working and not broken, why change?"

I completely agree, I've been using Dan's approach for years, and I get great negs and prints in Pt/Pd. Relatively simple and effective.

[WalkerBlackwell]

@michaelmutmansky None of the patches are duplicate. We error correct in a different way. In fact we've error corrected in a different way since 1994 which is why we've been linearizing Piezography at 256 patches internally for decades.

PiezoDN is both linear and non-linear in that everything is baseline calibrated linear and then optionally perceptually pulled into contrast depending upon the dMax and slope angle of the actual physical print.

Included is a tool for burning contrast intents directly into the .quad as well enabling split toning of contrast intents directly in QuadtoneRIP on-the-fly pre darkroom print.

Because everything is done in the .quad directly (except for optional perceptual print to screen matching which is done in an ICC that you print with in Print-Tool), this maintains the 16bit data-flow.

best,
Walker

ps: There is no reason why people wouldn't still be able to use their own systems however. The real magic is the baseline curve overlaps and ink frankly.

[bob carnie]

Hi Walker

Do you guys ever offer one or two day training on your systems?
I for one would be quite interested to learn

Bob

@michaelmutmansky None of the patches are duplicate. We error correct in a different way. In fact we've error corrected in a different way since 1994 which is why we've been linearizing Piezography at 256 patches internally for decades.

PiezoDN is both linear and non-linear in that everything is baseline calibrated linear and then optionally perceptually pulled into contrast depending upon the dMax and slope angle of the actual physical print.

Included is a tool for burning contrast intents directly into the .quad as well enabling split toning of contrast intents directly in QuadtoneRIP on-the-fly pre darkroom print.

Because everything is done in the .quad directly (except for optional perceptual print to screen matching which is done in an ICC that you print with in Print-Tool), this maintains the 16bit data-flow.

best,
Walker

ps: There is no reason why people wouldn't still be able to use their own systems however. The real magic is the baseline curve overlaps and ink frankly.

[Michael Mutmansky]

Do you work in pt/pd or other alternate processes? I think the variability of the coating process, the nature of matte surface papers, and the inherently low contrast of many alt processes would make a 129 patch linearization effectively impossible to achieve success using the Linearize function. It is inherently unable to properly work if the readings deviate too much from what it considers a properly increasing dataset. Unless I am not understanding you correctly.

[bob carnie]

Good Point Michael - I like using the numbers in PS and trying to see how they relate to the printed process.
I have found the best % of accurate lay down of tones was on my digital fibre prints where in the top end and lower end I see separation on print as read by the info pallete.
I have seen 96L values read as highlight density on silver , and 4 L values read as shadow density.
There is less tone separation on inkjet, But as you increase the gloss media we get better results.

I like what Sandy King said to me years ago , make a chart of 100 steps from 0 -100 and actually see on print how many you can achieve.. I think this is a critical step for any way one wants to make digital neg's.

As Michael points out getting all steps to read on the final print as they are seen in PS is almost impossible and there are some compromises to be expected. IMO this is where more ways of creating digital negatives is going to be on everyone's radar in the future.

Do you work in pt/pd or other alternate processes? I think the variability of the coating process, the nature of matte surface papers, and the inherently low contrast of many alt processes would make a 129 patch linearization effectively impossible to achieve success using the Linearize function. It is inherently unable to properly work if the readings deviate too much from what it considers a properly increasing dataset. Unless I am not understanding you correctly.

[sanking]

I suspect there is no hand coated alternative process that would allow use of the LINEARIZE command with a 129 step wedge. Even a 51 step wedge is incredibly difficult to reproduce with sufficient accuracy to permit use of LINEARIZE.

Sandy