Digital BW, The Print

There are several companies out there that can take tiff files and 
transfer to 35mm negatives.  I'm curious if anyone's given this 
process a try and how the prints came out.  Let me hear from you!

Treadwinkle

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "treadwinkle 
<VOLveeta@b...>" <VOLveeta@b...> wrote:
> There are several companies out there that can take tiff files and 
> transfer to 35mm negatives.  I'm curious if anyone's given this 
> process a try and how the prints came out.  Let me hear from you!
> 
> Treadwinkle

Hi;
When I first got into this I tried that approach, having 4x5 (not 
35mm) negs made and then printing onto silver. Two different 
machines at two different shops produced less than stellar results 
in B&W. I found the fine detail to be too mushy to go over 11x14 
(from a 4x5 neg!) and the hightlight compression produced images 
with no real sparkle. I did, however, see 35mm slides from the same 
machines that looked quite good on all counts. Beats me why they 
couldn't do it in B&W.

Steve Karafyllakis

http://www.stevekphoto.com

Hi Steve,

When I tried scanning some BWs vs Color on a flatbed with light-back, 
it became quite obvious that BWs have a much greater dynamic range 
than color. I am now being much more successful using a Polaroid 
SprintScan 45 and VueScan's LogCompression with these circa 1900 
glass plates.

I would therefore imagine the converse true: for BW, you will need 
equipment with a light source that can output a wider intensity range 
than is probably available with a system designed primarily for Color 
processing in order to correctly expose BW film ....

Best,
Alex 
Orlando Fla

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Steven 
Karafyllakis <stevek@e...>" <stevek@e...> wrote:

> Hi;
> When I first got into this I tried that approach, having 4x5 (not 
> 35mm) negs made and then printing onto silver. Two different 
> machines at two different shops produced less than stellar results 
> in B&W. I found the fine detail to be too mushy to go over 11x14 
> (from a 4x5 neg!) and the hightlight compression produced images 
> with no real sparkle. I did, however, see 35mm slides from the same 
> machines that looked quite good on all counts. Beats me why they 
> couldn't do it in B&W.
> 
> Steve Karafyllakis
> 
> http://www.stevekphoto.com

I appreciate the response, Steve.  I sure wish there was a perfect 
solution for this.  Guess we'll just have to keep waiting.  
Piezotones are fine, but I'm about ready to give in and set up that 
darkroom and get backt b&w film.

Treadwinkle

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Steven 
Karafyllakis <stevek@e...>" <stevek@e...> wrote:
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "treadwinkle 
> <VOLveeta@b...>" <VOLveeta@b...> wrote:
> > There are several companies out there that can take tiff files 
and 
> > transfer to 35mm negatives.  I'm curious if anyone's given this 
> > process a try and how the prints came out.  Let me hear from you!
> > 
> > Treadwinkle
> 
> Hi;
> When I first got into this I tried that approach, having 4x5 (not 
> 35mm) negs made and then printing onto silver. Two different 
> machines at two different shops produced less than stellar results 
> in B&W. I found the fine detail to be too mushy to go over 11x14 
> (from a 4x5 neg!) and the hightlight compression produced images 
> with no real sparkle. I did, however, see 35mm slides from the 
same 

> machines that looked quite good on all counts. Beats me why they 
> couldn't do it in B&W.
> 
> Steve Karafyllakis
> 
> http://www.stevekphoto.com

on 12/29/02 10:04 AM, treadwinkle <VOLveeta@...> at
VOLveeta@... wrote:

I appreciate the response, Steve.  I sure wish there was a perfect
solution for this.  Guess we'll just have to keep waiting.
Piezotones are fine, but I'm about ready to give in and set up that
darkroom and get backt b&w film.

Treadwinkle

Has anyone tried manipulating an image in Photoshop or whatever, outputting
a large negative ie. 11' x 14', onto acetate on a 2200 and then contact
printing this onto photographic paper?

Hugh



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

Not to my knowledge, but I'd love to see if this is possible.  It 
would be a dream come true if we could reach that point.

treadwinkle

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Hugh Crymble 
<hcrymble@b...> wrote:
> on 12/29/02 10:04 AM, treadwinkle <VOLveeta@b...> at
> VOLveeta@b... wrote:
> 
> I appreciate the response, Steve.  I sure wish there was a perfect
> solution for this.  Guess we'll just have to keep waiting.
> Piezotones are fine, but I'm about ready to give in and set up that
> darkroom and get backt b&w film.
> 
> Treadwinkle
> 
> Has anyone tried manipulating an image in Photoshop or whatever, 
outputting
> a large negative ie. 11' x 14', onto acetate on a 2200 and then 
contact

> printing this onto photographic paper?
> 
> Hugh
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

on 12/29/02 10:57 AM, treadwinkle <VOLveeta@...> at
VOLveeta@... wrote:

Not to my knowledge, but I'd love to see if this is possible.  It
would be a dream come true if we could reach that point.

treadwinkle

Making Digital Negatives for Contact Printing by Dan Burkholder appears to
deal with this topic, although I have not seen the book.

Hugh




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

Take a look at Dan Bulkholder's site He has a book about this subject.
Renan Lopes

http://www.danburkholder.com/Pages/main_pages/page1_main.htm

"treadwinkle " wrote:

> Not to my knowledge, but I'd love to see if this is possible.  It
> would be a dream come true if we could reach that point.
>
> treadwinkle

I tried this several years ago, initially to make Van Dyke Brown and Cyanotype prints but I did try Silver prints too.
I was quite surprised at the results although they did not have reproduce the fine detail to match the silver print although the alternative
processes did produce good results. 

I tried a number of different acetates and found a huge difference in quality. I did not ever match the quality of the silver print
but decided to use the imperfections in the method to try to create a different type of image. Bear in mind that this was 5 years ago
and materials have significantly improved since then. I do know of one company, Permajet, here in the UK that currently supplies an acetate
that has recieved very good reviews from photographers here. 

Dan Burkholders book is very good and he does cover the subject fully. I have seen Dan work when he did his digital workshop and 
I did  traditional printing for Calumet in Maryland and I can recommend that it is worth taking.

Les McLean 

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Hugh Crymble 
  To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Sunday, December 29, 2002 3:34 PM
  Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Re: Has anyone ever tried digital negatives?


  on 12/29/02 10:04 AM, treadwinkle <VOLveeta@...> at
  VOLveeta@... wrote:

  I appreciate the response, Steve.  I sure wish there was a perfect
  solution for this.  Guess we'll just have to keep waiting.
  Piezotones are fine, but I'm about ready to give in and set up that
  darkroom and get backt b&w film.

  Treadwinkle

  Has anyone tried manipulating an image in Photoshop or whatever, outputting
  a large negative ie. 11' x 14', onto acetate on a 2200 and then contact
  printing this onto photographic paper?

  Hugh



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


  Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:

  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint

  If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same page.

  Please follow these basic guidelines:
  - Include your full name with your message.
  - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
  - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep them short.
  - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
  - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or &amp;amp;quot;flames.&amp;amp;quot;
  - Complete your Yahoo profile.
  - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various resources on the homepage. 




  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 



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

I think the book would be well worth your time (www.danburkholder.com).  I have the first and second editions and learned about as much about Photoshop as making digital negs.  This process really works best, IMO, with alternate processes such as pt/pd or Van Dyke.  But remember, with these processes you are using textured paper that hides a lot of faults.  Also, pt/pd to begin with has a much greater tonal range than silver.  I have tried this both with contact negs produced by an imagesetter, and inkjet negs.  Of course, comparing the imagesetter 8x10 contact neg to a properly developed in-camera 8x10 neg, there was no contest, no matter how much work you can do in Photoshop.  I threw in the towel before trying this with a 4800 dpi imagesetter, and there things might have been different.  Certainly there is nothing wrong with the concept of enlarging negs for contact printing.  The best palladium prints I have ever seen in person were 20x24 negs produced in the darkroom from a 6x7cm original neg (David Kennedy, www.davidmichaelkennedy.com).

  --Ken

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Hugh Crymble 
  To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Sunday, December 29, 2002 10:26 AM
  Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Re: Has anyone ever tried digital negatives?


  on 12/29/02 10:57 AM, treadwinkle <VOLveeta@...> at
  VOLveeta@... wrote:

  Not to my knowledge, but I'd love to see if this is possible.  It
  would be a dream come true if we could reach that point.

  treadwinkle

  Making Digital Negatives for Contact Printing by Dan Burkholder appears to
  deal with this topic, although I have not seen the book.

  Hugh




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


  Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:

  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint

  If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same page.

  Please follow these basic guidelines:
  - Include your full name with your message.
  - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
  - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep them short.
  - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
  - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or &amp;amp;quot;flames.&amp;amp;quot;
  - Complete your Yahoo profile.
  - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various resources on the homepage. 




  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 


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

Renan: <Take a look at Dan Burkholder's site. He has a book about this 
subject....>

Speaking of Dan Burkholder, I have a new interview with him online (with some 
of his exquisite images) at:

http://www.dpandi.com/dan/dan.html

Harald Johnson
author, "Mastering Digital Printing"
DP&I.com ( http://www.dpandi.com )

Dan does this all the time.

Jerry



Hugh Crymble wrote:

> 
> on 12/29/02 10:57 AM, treadwinkle <VOLveeta@...> at
> VOLveeta@... wrote:
> 
> Not to my knowledge, but I'd love to see if this is possible.  It
> would be a dream come true if we could reach that point.
> 
> treadwinkle
> 
> Making Digital Negatives for Contact Printing by Dan Burkholder appears to
> deal with this topic, although I have not seen the book.
> 
> Hugh
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> 
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
> 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
> 
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same page.
> 
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - Include your full name with your message.
> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep them short.
> - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or &amp;amp;quot;flames.&amp;amp;quot;
> - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various resources on the homepage.
> 
> 
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Haven't personally done it since the late 80's/early 90's... And then, 
it was color separations done with a laser..  Quite rudimentary...

I know that Harald discusses it in his book. (obviously the technology 
is much better these days, but I don't have the time to try it myself 
right now)... Were I doing it today, I would run output to a film 
recorder, UNLESS I wanted some very specific effect from printing 
digital neg's (like to create paper negs, etc)

Besides, it sends me form a pure digital workflow to one that is mixed 
analog and digital..  Since I still generally start my processing with a 
scan of a chrome or negative, I'd be going analog to digital file to 
digital print to analog.. I really start to worry about generational and 
translational losses of data in such a scenario.

Although, I will certainly defer to the real world experiences of others
Keith

 

"Just some guy," and founder of the Multiverse's largest EPSON printer 
User Community (highly recommended by Vogon Poets and MegaDodo 
Publications), at:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EPSONx7x_Printers/
 
"For the rest of you out there, the secret is to bang the rocks together 
guys"

 


{ The P.O.V. Image Service Website is still at http://www.p-o-v-image.com/ }






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

At 10:34 AM -0500 12/29/02, Hugh Crymble wrote:

>.... Guess we'll just have to keep waiting.
>Piezotones are fine, but I'm about ready to give in and set up that
>darkroom and get backt b&w film.
>
>Treadwinkle
>
>
>


After a year plus of being serious about inkjet...I am about ready to 
go to Lightjet 5000 and Fuji crystal archive paper until the 
technology gets it together....While it is great to print your own 
out, the metamerism problem is bothersome to what I do with a toned 
black and white look.....the sepia's look greenish under 
daylight...but the blue toned images look just fine.

It is also the flaking and coating problems that are annoying 
me...Where is the silver bullet?  I want to do digital black and 
whites like I used to print in the darkroom and colorize them with no 
metamerism and not have to become a car painter to finish them...

Bill Agee
-- 

bill agee studio
capistrano beach, ca / laguna beach, ca

http://www.redsilver.com

Aside from my not-too-positive experience with film recorder output, 
I also took a swing at printing digital negs on an Epson 1280 using 
the OEM dye inks and Pictorico transparency film - www.pictorico.com 
which is currently the front runner for this use. It's a bit tricky, 
you can't put enough ink on the film to get a normal grey-scale neg, 
but if you print it with a strong red-orange cast it increases the 
spectral density of the neg enough to print on silver paper. Under a 
lupe the negs looked awfull, you could see a lot more printer 
texture than on a print, but they printed better than they looked. 
However, I felt the quality and sharpness would never equal a normal 
silver print. I do intend to try it fairly soon to print Liquid 
Light, and the consensus is that it works well enough for most other 
alternative processes where the roughness of paper and emulsion hide 
the flaws of the negative.

Best luck,

Steve Karafyllakis

http://stevekphoto.com

Steve,

What kind of film recorder/film did you use? What was the problem you ran
into? Resolution, curves, etc.

I have a MGI Solitaire which will shoot a 4x5 at 8K resolution (8196 pixels
wide). I would think that you could alter the curves and development times
to "tune" the image just like you would with an inkjet printer.

Bill

I have been making digital negatives on an Epson 1280 and 10000 for 
the past year.  These negatives have been made with the Epson Dyes on 
Pictorico OHP for Platinum printing.

I have also printed digital inkjet negatives on Ilford Multigrade IV 
Fiber paper with good results.

I use the Color Table method described in Burkholder's text, however, 
contrast adjustments are required. With platinum, the resulting 
prints are very nice, but lack the 3d glow of a fine platinum print 
made from a traditional negative. If you look at the print from a 
digital negative by itself, most people will ooh and ahh. However, 
when placed side by side with a tradition platinum print the print 
made from the digital negative has a "veiled" look. Kind of what some 
people speak of when comparing a resin coated silver print to a fiber 
base silver print.

My feeling is that the problem lies in the way the inks pass and 
reflect light.

I have looked at Burkholder's digital platinum prints. Although 
lovely, they lack the glow of a completely optical platinum print. 

My conclusion is that if I am going to spend the time and money to 
create a platinum portfolio, I want the best possible print quality I 
can get. So for now, I have decided to stick with the traditional 
methods of photography.

On the flip side, I must say that silver fiber prints made from 
imagesetter negatives have lovely. If you have never done so, I would 
highly recommend ordering a silver gelatin fb digital print from 
LensWork.

-Mike

If the workflow is calibrated from your monitor to the final print 
digital negs can solve a lot of problems. But because of the analog 
components within that worklow there is a good chance that the prints 
are really bad if your print lab is a "thinking" provider. I made a 
try from color digital to 35 mm filmrecorder (you spoke of 35 mm in 
the initial message) to several analog hour and pro labs some 
with color negs and slides years ago and the results were, let´s say, 
"not so good" with an astonishing rang of color casts. On the other 
hand I began to print inkjet contact negs for my cyanotypes and they 
give me an amazing flexibility because my inhouse calibration covers 
all stages from monitor preview to final print in black box style - I 
don´t care how the negs look and my Cyanos don´t care that they have 
to show a rich tonality. But that are no 35 mm negs. If you´ve got a 
lab that prints digitally to paper you´ve a real good chance to get 
constantly fine results after some tests. The magic thing is that they 
have to do everthing the same way if they print your pictures. 
Otherwise you optimize, they counter-optimize and you don´t go 
anywhere because there is no consistancy. If the lab treats your files 
equally when printing you should get astonishing results after some 
circles in the test phase. 

Have fun
  Kai