For your entertainment, enlightment, and enjoyment Jon Cone has posted a timely 2 part article about Piezography inks, digital negative production and QTR.
http://www.inkjetmall.com/wordpress/piezography/digital-film/digital-negatives-and-film/
Your assignment: Read and comment here.
Don Bryant
Jon was kind enough to make some clarifications, you can read them here: http://www.inkjetmall.com/wordpress/piezography/digital-film/digital-negatives-and-film-part-2/
As I mentioned this is a 2 part article.
Don
and another approach is to take a black ink that is known to be a good UV blocker, make your own dilutions for the additional channels, and use refillable cartridges or a CIS. Sounds like a pain but it only took about an hour -- ink is mostly distilled water with a tiny bit of glycerin and a wetting agent. I did this using MIS Eboni so I could make prints using 100% carbon pigment. The prints were beautiful but a bit too warm for my taste. I never tried this with digital negatives.I agree with Greg.
As Sandy King and I have been figuring out, some Cone inks can be used for digital negs, and we will be doing more to figure out which ones are best. One big advantage these monochrome inks have over colored inks is that they are all... much the same color - and thus presumably each have similar spectral response to UV (and visible light for that matter). This makes it easier to do rough assessments of a profile with transmission measurements of the negative, saving some test strip printing, and also means profiles are more likely to transfer from one exposure unit, and even process, to another with reasonably small differences. In other words my profile developed with BLB bulbs may be close with your Amergraph, etc.
In general, I suspect that a perfect inkset for digital negs is not a good one for positive inkjet prints. Jon Cone refers to this when he says that a narrow range of inks is best for negs; this is my experience also - no need for super-light or super-dense inks. So while one can make very good negatives with standard inksets, whether Epson, Canon, HP, or Piezography, the best results are probably to be gained with a dedicated machine that allows all the ink channels to be useful.
One could do this in an Epson inkset by moves like, for instance, running an extra LC cartridge in the LM slot (with a chip transplant on the cartridge - what warrranty?). And maybe both PK and MK would be useful. I'd have to think it through more.
Anyway, I don't see a big gain in what Jon is suggesting right now.
Ben
Well, I can definitely vouch for one point that Jon Cone made in his article about using the mixed K7 shades in two slots to make digital negatives. He said that you would not be able to print regular digital inkjet prints with the mixed shades and I just confirmed this. I changed over the shades a couple of days ago to see if I would be able to use the Cone profile but instead of purging the inks, which is very wasteful, I decided to just print through the inks in the lines until the old shades were cleared. So between yesterday and today I printed fourteen 24X36" prints to clear the lines and they all looked great, until the new shades kicked in on the last print, and there is definitely posterization as Cone promised. The place on the print where the change over took place was sudden, and quite dramatic.
Sandy
. A guy named Angel invented a work flow for using the HPZ 12 channel inks for OHP film with a greenish hue to the inks. Here is some of Angels work using that process - http://en.albarrancabrera.com/cosmos/ I am not sure how many channels he is actually using. HP had no interest and quit promoting it.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?