Yahoo Groups archive

Digital BW, The Print

Index last updated: 2026-04-28 22:56 UTC

Message

RE: [Digital BW] Re: Digital Platinum at PPE

2010-11-16 by Eric Neilsen

Going from a 8x10 to even 16x20 is not that hard, but going to a 30x40 doe
stake a bit of practice and the known R&D time to coat a bigger piece of
paper. Heck even getting bigger pieces of paper that has no flaws in it can
get to be a pain. 

 

 

Eric Neilsen

4101 Commerce Street, Suite 9

Dallas, TX 75226

214-827-8301

 

 <http://ericneilsenphotography.com/forum1> Let's Talk Photography

www.ericneilsenphotography.com

SKYPE ejprinter

 

From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
hjswim2@...
Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 10:15 AM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Digital Platinum at PPE

 

  

(I'm on Digest mode)

Eric: < Harold, How many of those printers had made 30x40 prints? Was their 
wow
being made because a 30x40 is just hard to do or that the neg was well 
made? >

I think both. Interestingly, Erwitt himself had never made a large platinum 
print; he was amazed. (Others like Dan Burkholder have been making large 
digital negs since 1991.) But what I'm hearing is that this is another step
up 
in both quality and workflow for large-scale platinum.

> John: < Be interesting to know how the prints made with digital inter 
> negatives, compared with those made using regular photo negatives? Have
you 
> seen any comparisons?
> 
No. It's only what I'm hearing from those who have done this. I, 
personally, have never made a platinum print, either traditionally or with
the newer 
hybrid digital-traditional systems.
> 
> < Reason I ask, obviously making 10 offs from an original neg is not a 
> problem, but you start making larger runs, and you risk damaging the
original 
> negative. This would obviously be a good technique to use in this type of 
> situation, as well as for making a Platinum/Paladium print larger than the

> original neg size.
> 
Correct. There's a growing idea that having a "digital archive negative" 
might be a smart idea. Kinda of a back-up in case everything else gets
ruined. 
Of course, you're stuck with that size.

Harald

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Attachments

Move to quarantaine

This moves the raw source file on disk only. The archive index is not changed automatically, so you still need to run a manual refresh afterward.