John Higbie Invents! Watch This (Pt/Pd laser printer)

[Alan9940]

Finally watched the video and found it pretty interesting. Regarding the pricing, given the fact that various photographers I know of charge upward of $200 for small pt/pd prints--in the 5x7 range, for example--I don't find his pricing to be way out of range. Yes, pricing may be a little on the high but who's the competition?

[Erik Larsen]

I am amazed at the ingenuity and skill involved in making a machine like this. I wouldn’t have a clue how to do it, I am very impressed! Although I still think a fax machine is voodoo black magic. Honestly I applaud the effort here. I imagine via software adjustments you could expose any uv capable process that would be able to be mounted on the drum. I wonder is this will go anywhere other than one man’s passion?

[Tin Can]

UVC is controlled many places, such as home furnaces, not a problem

and the first iteration of anything is made cheaper as machines are sold

[Sal Santamaura]

...He offers a printing service, not cheap...

...It's certainly expensive...

My perspective is different. For someone who's shooting digital today, but recognizes the long-term challenges of changing image file formats and the fugitive nature of inkjet prints, and who seeks to create a small archive of images that can remain in the hands of descendants for a millennium or longer, this might just be a huge bargain.

Salto in conjunction with a Japanese company have been doing laser pt pt prints for a long time now...

If memory serves, when Michael Smith was working with Salto he wrote that their prints were 600 lines per inch. It would be interesting to know whether Higbie's device exposes at that resolution, greater or less.

Cool, but unless for some reason someone wants big Platinum prints, I don’t think it offers anything vs either doing it yourself or skipping the whole silly thing and making inkjet prints. Then again that’s a somewhat more generalized view of Platinum/Palladium printing.

See my response above to Oren and sharktooth. "Doing it yourself" might apply to some on this forum, but likely not anyone exclusively working with digital imaging.

One could think of them as very stable inkjet prints, I suppose...

Very stable prints. Period. The negative connotations of "inkjet" need not be invoked.

[Vaughn]

UVC is controlled many places, such as home furnaces, not a problem
...

UVC cannot be safely used in alternative printing processes, unless there is tight control of light 'spillage', as in a contained exposure space (as in zero spillage). Exposure to UVC is very dangerous.

But one of the reasons I was wondering is because both UVB and UVC are mostly blocked glass (another reason not to use it)...but since his device is 'glass-less' (and normally covered), I was curious.