"Crystal Clear" OHP -- Sources?

gmikol · Feb 8, 2012

Hi All--

I'm wondering if anyone can recommend a good source for a "crystal clear" OHP film, versus Pictorico/Arista/Inkpress, which are all "cloudy".

I've seen some references to Ultrafine crystal clear OHP film, but all of those references are pretty old, and I don't see anything like that listed on their website. Any info is greatly appreciated.

--Greg

pschwart · Feb 8, 2012

Canon used to have a product called Transparent Clear Film. I used it for a while and the coating performed better than the Ultrafine product. It was very fast -- thinner and blocked less UV than Pictorico and Inkpress. It didn't come in a lot of cut sizes so I bought a roll. Cutting it up was a major PITA so I quit using it.

gmikol · Feb 8, 2012

Phil--

Thanks for the reference...I hadn't come across that one in my initial searches. But, alas, it appears to be discontinued.

Next suggestion?

--Greg

pschwart · Feb 8, 2012

How desperate are you? I might have some of the Canon and Ultrafine product, but I wouldn't think it worth your while since they seem to be discontinued.
I say just find something that works and looks like it will be around for a while. Why do you need clearer film?

David A. Goldfarb · Feb 8, 2012

A problem with clear film is that your printer may not be able to tell when it is loaded, so it may not print on it. That's why it is cloudy. My HP B9180 has this issue.

gmikol · Feb 8, 2012

pschwart said:
How desperate are you? I might have some of the Canon and Ultrafine product, but I wouldn't think it worth your while since they seem to be discontinued.
I say just find something that works and looks like it will be around for a while. Why do you need clearer film?

Not desperate. I'm looking for something to use going forward. I've been looking into using the UltraStable sensitizer for carbon, as opposed to dichromate. It seems to be less sensitive than dichromate, so I'm looking for every possible improvement I can get. Even 1/3 of a stop improvement in the total system (glass + mylar + OHP + etc.) would bring my 20+ minute exposures in my NuArc to something closer to 15. And this would make a big difference in heat build-up.

I'm also looking into other glass options that might have more transmission at 335nm compared to soda lime glass.

BTW--I've got an Epson 3880...I don't know if it has trouble loading clear films or not.

--Greg

pschwart · Feb 8, 2012

My 3800 has enough trouble just loading milky films. I think it has a problem loading thin stocks -- lots of misfeeds, especially using the front sheet loader.
How about using a higher dichromate and/or pigment concentration?

gmikol · Feb 8, 2012

Like I said...not using dichromate, and I can't increase the sensitizer concentration, since I'm very near the published solubility limit. And I'm already at >3.0 logD exposure scale. Increasing pigment concentration alone will do nothing to speed up printing.

I use the rear feeder for pictorico...only problem I ever had was with my R1900, and the feed rollers just needed to be cleaned.

--Greg

pschwart · Feb 9, 2012

gmikol said:
Increasing pigment concentration alone will do nothing to speed up printing.

I think you will find that it does. You can also decrease the negative density.

gmikol · Feb 9, 2012

pschwart said:
gmikol said:

Increasing pigment concentration alone will do nothing to speed up printing.

Click to expand...

I think you will find that it does. You can also decrease the negative density.

Phil--

This goes against much of what I thought I knew about carbon exposure. The model I had in my mind is that the pigment acts as a sort of ND filter, attenuating the UV light as it goes deeper into the gelatin. So according to that model, increasing the pigment concentration will lessen the relief, since I'll get more pigment in a thinner layer of gelatin, but should take the same amount of exposure to reach the same Dmax, because the UV gets attenuated more rapidly, due to the increased concentration of pigment.

So what am I missing?

--Greg

pschwart · Feb 9, 2012

Try it, then explain it I dunno, I guess the higher concentration results in more image pigment per area measure even though the extra pigment adds UV blocking.

gmikol said:
Phil--

This goes against much of what I thought I knew about carbon exposure. The model I had in my mind is that the pigment acts as a sort of ND filter, attenuating the UV light as it goes deeper into the gelatin. So according to that model, increasing the pigment concentration will lessen the relief, since I'll get more pigment in a thinner layer of gelatin, but should take the same amount of exposure to reach the same Dmax, because the UV gets attenuated more rapidly, due to the increased concentration of pigment.

So what am I missing?

--Greg

PVia · Feb 9, 2012

If you have trouble loading because of clear/milky bases, then attach the sheet to a backing paper. Use small pieces of double stick tape outside the printing area if you need to...

pschwart · Feb 9, 2012

I know folks do this, but I find it way too much trouble. On the 3800, I have the most success using the rear sheet loader. My R1800 has no trouble at all loading Inkpress or Pictorico.

gmikol · Feb 9, 2012

pschwart said:
Try it, then explain it I dunno, I guess the higher concentration results in more image pigment per area measure even though the extra pigment adds UV blocking.

Well...it will be a couple of weeks before I get a chance to make more tissue. I'll be sure to report back.

But getting back to the original thread...are there any other (currently in production) options for "crystal clear" OHP?

And does anybody know of an easy (and inexpensive) way to measure transmission or density at 335nm? That's way outside the range of something like an X-Rite 361.

--Greg

pschwart · Feb 10, 2012

Inkpress Clear Film might be worth investigating:

Ink Press

gmikol · Feb 10, 2012

Thanks for this tip...I had read some mixed reviews about the transparency film, but I didn't know they had a crystal clear film.

Best part? They have 5-sheet sample packs.

--Greg

pschwart · Feb 10, 2012

I have never used the clear film, but I gave up Pictorico for the Inkpress OHP long ago. I pleaded with Pictorico to sell OHP in packages larger than 20 sheets but they don't seem to understand how their product is used. Inkpress in 50 sheet boxes with interleaving sheets, that's the ticket

gmikol · Feb 17, 2012

Came across 2 other candidates while digging around. Anyone ever try Projet inkjet film (Adorama house brand), or Apollo Transparency Film?

Dead Link Removed
Apollo Transparency Film - BLICK art materials

--Greg

BillSchwab · Mar 9, 2012

Try Sihl 3160 USA Spirit Film. I use it and love it in comparison to Pictorico.

Sihl 3160 USA Spirit Clear Film

gmikol · Mar 9, 2012

Hmmmm...Rolls only. I don't really want to have to wrestle with cutting down film for my 3880.

I have some Inkpress clear film, also 5 mil. Doesn't inkpress relabel some Sihl papers? I wonder if they're doing the same for films...

Thanks for the tip.

--Greg

pschwart · Mar 9, 2012

When I was having an e-mail exchange with Inkpress in July 2010 their OHP was being supplied by
Sihl Diatec Group. I agree -- if you make smaller negatives rolls are PITA to handle and wasteful.
Inkpress is savvy enough to offer 8-1/2x11 in 50 sheet box with interleaving, much better packaging than those silly 20-sheet Pictorico packs, so I am sticking with them for now.

"Crystal Clear" OHP -- Sources?

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency