Image setter negatives

[Gustavo_Castilla]

1 Do you scan your negs or chromes?

2 do you plan to have negatives made from you Chromes or negatives in order to do contact printing ?
3 If you in did make negatives from you chromes or enlarge negatives what seizes do you use?

What printing processes do you normally use?
this is more for the person that shoots a smaller neg say 8 X 10 and under and for example wants to do a Platinum print 8X20 or a 3 color carbon or color to B&W



Gustavo Castilla

 

[Bob Carnie]

I am currently testing rollie ortho 25 on my lambda to output con tone film for alternative printing. (carbon, platinum and tri colour gum) . I am not sure yet of possible success or failure using this method, If no go then I will try an image setter.
I would love to be able to have full print size negatives produced this way.
I am going to set just under 24x30 as my final sizes for client work.

 

[imazursky]

I scan my 4x5, 5x7, 8x10 and 12x20's on my drum scanner.
For the 12x20's i also contact print them. At some point also on Lodima (if it ever shows up).
A 20x24 enlarged neg would be nice for the 4x5's and 8x10's.
It would be an interesting comparison to see how the imagesetter negs compared to an enlarged one made from a LVT enlarged neg.

One of the issues with imagesetter negs is the line screen. It probably needs to be set to the tightest setting, 175-200 or tighter.
From my very brief imagesetting days, the finer the line screen the harder it is to keep the imagesetter and processing calibrated.
But that was with imagesetting film and rapid access processing.

 

[Bob Carnie]

Hi Ian

My lambda prints continuous tone laser exposure at 400ppi, there is no screen and when louping the print or film all you will see is the original film grain.
I am testing ISO 25 orthofilm for this purpose.

I scan my 4x5, 5x7, 8x10 and 12x20's on my drum scanner.
For the 12x20's i also contact print them. At some point also on Lodima (if it ever shows up).
A 20x24 enlarged neg would be nice for the 4x5's and 8x10's.
It would be an interesting comparison to see how the imagesetter negs compared to an enlarged one made from a LVT enlarged neg.

One of the issues with imagesetter negs is the line screen. It probably needs to be set to the tightest setting, 175-200 or tighter.
From my very brief imagesetting days, the finer the line screen the harder it is to keep the imagesetter and processing calibrated.
But that was with imagesetting film and rapid access processing.

 

[imazursky]

Hi Bob, I meant that for Gustavo and his imagesetter which does have a line screen.
Im not sure of the specs for the linotronics that i think he has.
But im sure with the correct rip he can get it to do what he needs.

 

[jd callow]

the last of the image setters that I had output from were capable of 300 or 330 line screens for halftones that purportedly could render 256 shades (not that any press/plate could achieve the tonal range). The image setter's resolution was 2.7 or 3k if I recall correctly. To do multi colour work (duo, tri cmyk or cmyk+spot) relied upon very expensive RIPs. I am not sure how it is done today as my experience is all more than 10 years gone.

 

[imazursky]

IIRC, I know a few imagesetters like the Dolevs and Sherpa's can run stochastic (FM) screening (RIP permitting).
When you go over 200+ (AM) line screen the chances of moire on press is so high that a hybrid screening or stochastic is used.
I like hybrid better then stochastic alone but its still hard to do. The press has to be in tip top shape and the pressman has to be on the ball!
The press room would have to be climate controlled....it's a hard thing to get right.

I used to do a lot of pre press. I had some training in image setters but never spent much time using them.
CTP has surpassed them by far. Most shops in the US are CTP or DI now. My favorite presses are the ones that image the plate on press.
Very cool to watch. 10 or 20 years and the pressman will be a thing of the past. Push a button and the press will take care of everything.

 

[jd callow]

stochastic and high fidelity presses were just coming online as I left the print world for the internets -- early 1995. Direct to plate technology was in its infancy.

 

[Joe Lipka]

I used image setters for pt/pd printing a long time ago (as measured in "internet time") and found that negatives good for photographic purposes were much harder to create than those used for regular offset printing. The resolution requirements needed for photographs were almost at the limit of the machine.

I stopped using image setter negatives when desktop printers could do the job quicker and with less expense.

 

[Gustavo_Castilla]

It looks like the Image setter I have can go as high as 3600 DPI

 

[imazursky]

I believe in this case it will be all in the RIP.
Are you planing on using image setting film or a continuos tone film?

I almost nought a few of these when i was into the local auction scene.
My business partner at the time used to run all forms of image setters, scanners and pre press stuffs.
He told me not to buy them. They came with the original Lino RIP box and that was a pain to use and its unsupported.
If it died it died. If you do get it working, figure out how to back it up. Maybe pop the drives out and clone them.

If you can figure it out, it may work for you.
If not, you can always sell it overseas (africa, east europe...) or south america.
Image setters are still big business in those areas.

 

[Gustavo_Castilla]

Not sure as of today the machine has a roll of lith film on it I figure I will used what is there to get familiar with the system before I can make a decision as to film developer convo

 

[jd callow]

It looks like the Image setter I have can go as high as 3600 DPI

Yes, but it cannot do 3600 dpi in continuous tone.

 

[Gustavo_Castilla]

the c330 can do up to 35and change and from what I learned so far the film best suite is panchromatic

 

[L Gebhardt]

Yes, but it cannot do 3600 dpi in continuous tone.

To get 256 shades of gray from an image setter you need to divide the resolution by 16. So each "pixel" is made up of a 16x16 grid of dots. So the 3600dpi becomes 225ppi in the best case.