I think it is a bit more complicated. There is pt/pd, and there is pt/pd printed with digital negatives, which then bring to the process most of the enhancements of digital. Even split toning would be possible for a very dedicated printer.Originally Posted by Tyler Boley
Printing pt/pd with in-camera negatives has the same pros and cons as printing silver from in-camera negatives. Add digital control and we are in a new world.
Sandy King
and yet given the same file, brought to the same level of calibration digitally one way or another at the various stages available, I can get deeper richer blacks on similarly beautiful surfaces than I can with pt/pd...
But does that make it better?
Complicated indeed.
Tyler
But I am not certain you are right about that. I am told that the pt/pd prints made by Salto for folks like Michael Smith and George Tice have similar Dmax to the best that can be had with inkjet prints, or any other process.
But no, more Dmax does not make it better. Hand made prints are simply different because they are hand made. And if the print also incorporates all of the digital controls that goes into the creation of an inkjet file, it is a hand made print that is one stage removed from the inkjet print in terms of human input.
Sandy
Sandy, I don't mean to argue as I generally agree with you most of the time. And I will, after this, not contribute to hyjacking this thread further. Perhaps a new thread is in order.
But, I just don't get this any more, I hear it all the time. My digital ink prints are far more individually crafted than anything I ever did with light sensitive materials- silver, kallitype, platinum, any of that. Far more effort goes into the particulars of the ink blend for each image than was possible before, and paper choice. Many more days of considering changes after test print curing, etc.. Just as determinations about whether or not there should be a little less gold in a Kallitype...
Then after all that is determined, the sheet inspection, prebrushing, print time at the highest quality settings, post handling and rejection rate, makes for just as much care and handling as my decades of darkroom work. All this assumes I've got perfectly performing nozzles, which alone can consume some time. In fact, I'll bet a darkroom session can yield a higher number of unrejected finals for an edition than a day of inkjet. Anyone that spends some time working over here is always amazed at what goes into this stuff, and how time consuming it is, and how failure prone it is.
I have to assume at this point that SOME people making this distinction between hand made and fine inkjet just really don't know what is involved with either and are making some unfortunate assumptions. Admittedly, most inkjets were not done as above, but neither were most light sensitive prints made as your carbons are.
Tyler
Tyler,
You have your opinions. I have mine.
But the fact of the matter is that I craft my digital files very individually, perhaps not with your talent, but still I take them a long, long way.
After that, you press a button and make an inkjet print. At that point I press a button and have a digital negative. From that pont I still have a very long way to go before I get a real carbon transfer print. In fact, that point is really a beginning point for me, not the end. There really is no comparison in terms of the hand made input. Whether anyone gives a damn or not is beside the point, but it is not the same.
Phtogravure folks might say to me, yes, your final carbon print is our resist for etching and making a gravure print. And they are right. That does not make a gravure any more valuable than a carbon transfer print, but is an extra step of creativity, as is the making of a pt/pd or carbon transfer print from a digital file compared to immediate output from an inkjet printer.
Sandy
I think this is an important point. It gets missed too often. I mix my own b&w ink formula using Cone's inks as a base, the research to make it all work was extensive. Earlier this year I remapped the crossovers as I found that the RIP maker's recommendations were all wrong, and the transitions were starved. I did a lot of testing and now have a perfect 45 degree angle in the density dialog, and a great gray ramp. The RIP maker confirmed my results and now has new recommendations.
I did a lot of testing of things when I worked with alternative processes as well, as I am sure everyone does. Silver printing is a piece of cake in comparison.....
Lenny
EigerStudios
Museum Quality Drum Scanning and Printing
oh dear lord no Sandy, I'm still days away.... I may make a proof, a test, change the ink blend, do another, wait for drydown and cure between each... change the hue, realize the hue is great but requires slightly different luminosity or contrast now now, back and forth. I rarely get a print done within a week of the initial scan and have several going at once, along with other people's work of course.
The file hours/days of file prep are only the beginning, and must be returned to often as well since materials decisions will alter ealier decisions.
Press a button, oh man...
honestly, I don't think opinions have much to do with it.
Tyler
Sorry, but I believe it was you who stated that you did want to argue with me, but then commenced to do so. That is why I said that you had your opinions, and I have mine.
But I can see that this discussion is a waste of time so Lord spare me from any more of the inanities that generally ensue from useless dialog.
Sandy
wow, whatever happened there was not my intention at all. I don't know what to say other than my apologies to Sandy and the list.
Tyler
Perhaps it would be better to just address the question of the OP, scanning 4X5" film.
My apologies for straying into another discussion.
Sandy
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks