Digital Negatives for AZO

[sanking]

Has anyone created a pictorico (or similar transparancy) digital negative on an inkjet printer and contact printed it on fiber silver gelatin paper (I have only worked on traditional enlarger papers, but can move to the foma contact or even azo if need be) and been completely satisfied with the results?

I have not done this for silver gelatin paper but I have done so for carbon printiing on smooth papers, which can actually convey more detail than silver gelatin. The result, even in the most favorable comparisons, was some slight loss of image quality in comparison to in-camera negatives.

At this point in time even the best inkjet negtives on Pictorico do not appear to give image quality equal to in-camera negatives (or digital negatives from imagesetters) when the final product is a print on a very smooth surface.

For Pt/Pd and other alternative processes on art and drawing papers, negatives on Pictorico give virtually identicla results to prints from in-camera negatives, IMHO.

Sandy King

 

[Jeremy]

I think I may need to re-post one more time--completely due to my own fault. My originals will be from 35mm and 6x6 negatives. I don't expect the prints to be equal to what can be done with an 8x10 original negative, but comparable to an enlargement from 35mm or 120 film. This is also keeping in mind to my amateur skills in the darkroom. I'm thinking that if the sharpness is not an issue I can deal with a loss in resolution (if not too large) as I will have much more control over the actual image than I would in the wet darkroom.

I guess the biggest question is about the sharpness issue.

Sandy, do you print your digital negs from an inkjet and do you find them sharp?

 

[sanking]

Sandy, do you print your digital negs from an inkjet and do you find them sharp?

Hi Jeremy,

Yes, I print my digiital negative wth an Epson 2000P inkjet printer. And they are very, very sharp, perhaps more so than if I were to contact print direcly from the original negative since I am able to enhance sharpness with the unsharp mask feature in Photoshop.

But, note the caveats.

1. I get better image qualaity in carbon on smooth papers with in-camera negaives than with digital inkjet negatives, and

2. I am working from scans of original 5X7" negatives, not 35mm or roll film size.

When printing with kallitype or Pt/Pd on water color and drawing papers the inkjet negatives give results virtually equal to in-camera negatives.

Sandy King

 

[bmac]

Just a heads up for anyone interested in Digital Negatives for Silver prints. The latest issue of View Camera has a great article on how to go about doing it.

 

[Jeremy]

thanks for the heads up, I will head over to Hastings today if I have the extra time and pick up a copy... thanks!

 

[rogein]

The 'essential' info is also available at:

http://www.bradhinkel.com/Correction Curves for Digital Negatives.htm

 

[Jeremy]

I went ahead and picked up the issue and saw some wonderful images by a number of APUG contributors.

 

[philsweeney]

I just ftped a test print to copygraphics to verify my curve for grade 3 AZO. Brad Hinkel's article really helped. However I have had to apply a levels changing the midpoint, in advance of the curve to adjust the overall contrast. My previous tests show the prints to be tolerable and much sharper than anything I have done inkjet. Did not like the halftone negs even at 425lpi/3600dpi (you could see there was a linescreen). There were problems with the 3600 dpi stochastics negs also. Peter has found a workaround where I send a grayscale file with curve and he processes with rastus.

 

[GreyWolf]

Someone who took one of our workshops is making 8x10 negatives, digitizing them, and using the digital negatives to make prints on Azo. he said it took him a couple of tries to get the curves right, but now that he has, he feels he is making the best prints he ever made. His last comment, " I spent the day in the darkroom yesterday and am finally getting prints that are exceeding my expectations."

He has agreed to write up, as an article, what he is doing including the curves he has used. I have not seen the article, but it may be on the way now. It will be posted under "Writings about Azo: in the "Azo" section at www.michaelandpaula.com.

This article still has not appeared. Any idea when it might or is this a lost project?

Kind Regards,

 

[Michael A. Smith]

We have not received the article yet. We did receive an email from this fellow saying that he felt he still had a little moer work to do. He wants to get it right for sure so it will be useful to others.

 

[GreyWolf]

Thanks Michael.

 

[philsweeney]

I printed the imagesetter test negative and the result was total failure. My initial results with a inkjet were good following Brad's article. I am going to try it again, but measure the test print with a densitometer and convert the readings to percent with a spreadsheet Brooks Jensen gave me.

 

[philsweeney]

Basically using Brad's guidelines I did the test again using a densitometer instead of the scanner. Success. I can now construct a curve for a given paper with two imagesetter negs. But after the initial tests: initial test chart and then a neg to prove the curve construction, I'll only need to run a neg to prove the curve since I already have the test chart neg. The only time I'd have to print another test chart is if I used a different linescreen. We are now running a test using icefields. I am then going to compare a AZO print from a in-camera neg against a imagesetter neg.

 

[philsweeney]

Prefer the rastus linescreen over the icefields. Unsharp mask settings 50/10/3 to 75/10/3. 600dpi files to 1800 dpi bitmap processed at 1800 dpi. Processing at 3600 dpi is problematic (streaking). I think this is the sharpest AZO print I can get from an imagesetter negative. Unless the problems with steaking is solved.

 

[Jim Moore]

We have not received the article yet. We did receive an email from this fellow saying that he felt he still had a little moer work to do. He wants to get it right for sure so it will be useful to others.

Michael,

Any news on the article yet?

Thanks!

Jim

 

[Michael A. Smith]

Not yet. We saw some prints last month and they still had a way to go. I believe this fellow got discouraged with Azo. Why, I'm not sure.

Michael A. Smith

 

[Francesco]

"I believe this fellow got discouraged with Azo."

Let me speculate why - he could not get close to the quality of AZO contact prints made with in-camera negatives no matter how hard he tried. And perhaps he had a strong initial belief or preconceived notion that digital negatives could equal, perhaps even surpass, in-camera negatives vis-a-vis AZO contact prints. I am curious as to his results.

 

[bmac]

I was also working on a digital negative curve for AZO. We got very close with Berger FB Glossy, and Forte Polywarmtone, but for some reason, the ones we did with AZO weren't in the same league. In theory AZO should be the perfect paper for this type of thing, but its curve is so different than enlarging paper, it would take a long long time to perfect. I gave up with all of them. Basically, it is more fun being in the out doors shooting than sitting in front of a computer.

 

[philsweeney]

Brian: yes being in front of the computer is a bore. My interest in the digital negative is to complete a series of photos where I have 4 defective 4 x 5 negatives and I am printing them to Ilford Galerie. I completed the AZO curve test in one shot. And did it for no good reason. You would be surprised to find the curve for grade 3 AZO is similar to the curve for Galerie grade 2. Its hard for me to make a direct comparison to a print from a in-camera negative because I never had any 8 x 10 negatives scanned. Michael: if you'd like I can send you the calibration test print which is the "ole moire lady" calibration image used with 4 curves on one print. Cannot say when I would be able to make a direct comparison. I would say the quality is good and would allow one to "save" an image. And your non-photographer friends ain't going to know.