Mistaken Assumptions about Digital Negatives

[sanking]

I saw this comment by Bob Carnie in another thread, but thought it better to answer it with a new thread rather than intruding on the original thread of the OP.

I was making some silver prints the other day for a gallery show and using PS to inkjet neg,'s on silver and I was amazed at what I was able to produce, If I can only make the dmax on the pictorico film more dense to block a bit more I think we will all find this is the wave of the future for silver printing. What I noticed on the white borders was bleed through, and on the internet there are many that say this method is better than silver negs or as good, I do not believe it yet but open to see how the blocking power can be increased.... Many talk about process, few master, and most bullshit about the prowess of this method, I feel its not there yet for silver but really , really damm close and a big opportunity for Ilford to find a whole new generation of young clients that do not want to learn how to operate a enlarger, or even have the space to set a decent one up.

Taking this thread away from the OP here a bit and I apologize..

Well, I don't want to detract from the OPs thread either, but Bob is absolutely wrong about the blocking power of digital inkjet negatives. There is way more than enough density range for any silver or alternative printing process. Many people are having no problem at all printing in pure palladium with digital inkjet negatives, and the required density range for pure palladium is WAY more than what is required for silver printing.

You got to believe me on this, Bob. I don't have 5% of your knowledge about silver printing, but I do know something about making high quality negatives with both film and digital that match the exposure scale of the process to the density range of the negatives in such a way that there is plenty blocking to give clean and clear highlights. I once used BTZS for film negatives, and now do most of my work with digital negatives. The digital negative process is pretty easy once you learn the secret of a raster image processor like QTR when used with an Epson photo printer. I teach this stuff in a day when doing carbon transfer workshops, and most people with lesser printing skills than you come to a pretty good understanding of it. But I have to admit, it took me a long time to really master the skill, but eventually it was possible with the application of basic understanding of photographic sensitometry as that applies to the effective blocking of the inks in an Epson ink set as it applies to specific processes. For the very highest image quality, especially highlight rendering through the digital negative, you may need to use a custom all gray ink set for monochrome silver prints. On the other hand, I use an Epson with the original OEM for my CMY color carbon work and with the multi-layering highlight gradations are very smooth.

Unfortunately, in order to make high quality digital negatives one has to have some mastery of the process. Both negative making skills and printing skills are required for optimum control of process. And there is no magical box that has a button one can push to transfer a complex skill set from one mind to the other. As you should know, to do good work with any hand made process you just have to saturate your mind with knowledge, and get your hands wet. And a master printer should not try to farm out the digital negative component to an assistant, because having a good negative to work with is at the core of fine print making. What was it Ansel Adams said about the negative and the print?

Sandy