Mistaken Assumptions about Digital Negatives

[sanking]

Bob, what are you using for the digital negative substrate?

It's been my experience that using glossy inkjet paper for the negative substrate prints with clean white borders using Ilford Multigrade paper and Epson OEM pigmented inks. No masking required.

I believe this is the method Mike Rosenberg uses.

Don Bryant

Some years ago I visited with Mike Rosenberg and had a chance to see his work and understand the methodology of his QTR profiling system. I sure did not see any "bleed through" on his prints.

I found the method interesting and eventually adapted it to my carbon printing, and have since taught a highly modified version of this method in my carbon workshops, and to my friend Sam Wang for silver printing, and Sam and Chris Anderson for cyanotype. One of the important adjustments I make with the basic profile is to adjust the blocking density for each process so that the main ink blockers are used at a percentage that blocks equal light, which varies of course according to process and exposing light. This practice minimizes the appearance of grain.

My opinion is that in blocking it does not matter if it is done with silver or pigment. If you put down enough of either to get the same transmission DMAX on the negative, the result should be the same, and it always has been so in my experience.

If interested, I describe what I do in a folder on the carbon forum at groups.io. https://groups.io/g/carbon/files/QTR...bon%20Printing

Sandy

[NedL]

and, if the borders are clean using rubylith, it helps rule out the substrate

(for my very long exposures salt printing paper negatives, rubylith eventually leaks too much UV and the borders fog... I usually put thin foil tape along the edges of the rubylith window! )

[scheinfluger_77]

Recently, saw this guy's work- http://www.michaelmassaia.com Very amazing to see in person in gallery lighting! I saw his 30"x40" toned silver prints of central park made from digital internegs. They were shot at night with an 8x10 on black and white film. That's about all I know of his process, would be nice to know more. The photos have great tonality from highlights to shadow detail, that's not easy with nighttime photography! Absolutely no grain and tack sharp.

These are amazing on the computer screen, in-person must really be something. Does he shoot at that magical hour where there is still detail in the sky? Or two exposures? Or one really long one? I’m bowled over.

[bob carnie]

Bob, what are you using for the digital negative substrate?

It's been my experience that using glossy inkjet paper for the negative substrate prints with clean white borders using Ilford Multigrade paper and Epson OEM pigmented inks. No masking required.

I believe this is the method Mike Rosenberg uses.

Don Bryant

Glossy inkjet paper , are you suggesting a paper negative??

[bob carnie]

Red Ruby of course would work as a way of cleaning borders, I am interested in how on a Epson Printer using Pictorico or Inkpress one can put enough black on the material to stop complete bleed through , pretty simple but obviously in my workflow not possible. I do not see how printing on a paper stock and then contacting through that paper stock will give me a high quality print on silver, what am I missing or reading wrong here, I do not doubt other peoples observations, Just I am comparing silver digital neg's and inkjet neg's off an Epson and in my space putting the two negs on the lightbox it is very apparent that I can see through the black (white border) on inkjet much more than the silver, Both negatives btw on matt paper and watercolour paper for palladium print identical... On Silver Multigrade Glossy both prints appear similar to my and other eyes, but there is definitely a greying of the border on the inkjet.

I find this hard to describe to those who are not doing both methods of neg making and therefore not able to see what I am seeing.

[Thad Gerheim]

These are amazing on the computer screen, in-person must really be something. Does he shoot at that magical hour where there is still detail in the sky? Or two exposures? Or one really long one? I’m bowled over.

Right, the computer screen doesn't come close to doing these photos justice. The quality of his printing not to mention such interesting compositions is somewhat mind boggling. Obviously he's using very small apertures and must be exposing for the shadows and pulling development for the highlights. Reciprocity and wind with long exposures make for a challenge. He says on his website that he shoots late night and early morning. Would be nice to know what film/developer that he is using. I don't know what the night sky looks like from central park (I'm sure it's a lot different from where I live), but a lot of the photos look like they were done in early morning. How he is making his internegative is also the question.

[angusparker]

While I agree with many above that the dMax for SG and alt processes like Pt is sufficient, my real problem with digital negatives from inkjet is resolution. Regardless of the files size of the original image and even when printing at highest quality on an Epson inkjet like the 3880 on Pictórico with the magenta etc, I find the results a little underwhelming. Something about how the ink is laid down on the plastic substrate just isn’t the same as paper.

Interestingly, when I had some carbon prints made for me by Calvin Grier he uses three imagesetter digital negatives for highlights, mid tone, and darks, and sometimes even a fourth negative for a glossy dark overlay to get really rich blacks. The results are spectacular with great tonal range as one would expect but also very fine detail.

Sadly the imagesetter machines are huge, old, and most operators have given up on them. The negative uses a SG process, so it’s not an approximation like pictorico on an inkjet.

Perhaps someone else has an idea of how to improve digital negatives. For starters, I don’t think a RIP or different customized ink sets will do much for a digital negatives.

[IanBarber]

Regardless of the files size of the original image and even when printing at highest quality on an Epson inkjet like the 3880 on Pictórico with the magenta etc, I find the results a little underwhelming. Something about how the ink is laid down on the plastic substrate just isn’t the same as paper.

What is it that you are finding underwhelming

[calebarchie]

Perhaps someone else has an idea of how to improve digital negatives. For starters, I don’t think a RIP or different customized ink sets will do much for a digital negatives.

Why would you think that? You should be using QTR regardless, if you can live with smaller prints 1.5pl heads and dye inks will achieve higher print resolutions.

[angusparker]

Why would you think that? You should be using QTR regardless, if you can live with smaller prints 1.5pl heads and dye inks will achieve higher print resolutions.

I’ll check it out. What is 1.5pl heads mean?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro