OHP for 1280

To stick a toe in the water before I invest in a 3800 for digital negatives, I bought a very inexpensive 1280.

What is the recommended OHP film at this time for the 1280? I've read that conventional wisdom is that Pictorico blocks some UV. I think I also read somewhere that the Canon film puddles with the 1280.

Any other recommendations?

I've been doing in camera negatives for Pd Na2 for two years and am very excited to enlarge some of my medium format negatives. I think I am going to start with the Dan Burkholder method (as I've had the book and disc for two years), but may go on to one of the colorized negatives.

Thanks for any guidance on which OHP will work best for this 1280.
Neal

wilsonneal said:

To stick a toe in the water before I invest in a 3800 for digital negatives, I bought a very inexpensive 1280.

What is the recommended OHP film at this time for the 1280? I've read that conventional wisdom is that Pictorico blocks some UV. I think I also read somewhere that the Canon film puddles with the 1280.

Any other recommendations?

I've been doing in camera negatives for Pd Na2 for two years and am very excited to enlarge some of my medium format negatives. I think I am going to start with the Dan Burkholder method (as I've had the book and disc for two years), but may go on to one of the colorized negatives.

Thanks for any guidance on which OHP will work best for this 1280.
Neal

Click to expand...

A couple of things Neal.

1) You probably know this, but don't make any judgements by the results you get using the 1280 about the quality of the output of the 3800.

2) Pictorico OHP is probably one of the most expensive substrates but it also works very well handling ink which may in the end cost less because you won't waste ink and transparency material.

3) You may wish to consider the Inkjet Press transparency material which works as well as Pictorico but is slightly less expensive.

4) Photo Warehouse Ultrafine transparency material tended to jam in the 1280 and the ink had difficulty drying. This maybe true of the Canon transparency material.

5) The 1280 OEM dye inks have a high UV density, higher than some of the subsequent Epson pigmented and dye inks.

6) Be sure to properly align the print heads using the transparency material. One of the nice things about Pictorico OHP is that it has almost zero dot gain making print head alignment easier.

7) The 1280 tends to show dither patterns in contone areas of images such as open skys and clouds. Some have reported better performance (visible dither reduction) by taping the substrate to a sheet of paper.

8) Consider just getting the 3800 to begin with the learning will be no more difficult but the IQ will be a magnitude better and is supported by products such as Quad Tone RIP or you can use the ABW feature to generate negatives.

My 2 cents,

Don Bryant

wilsonneal said:

To stick a toe in the water before I invest in a 3800 for digital negatives, I bought a very inexpensive 1280.

What is the recommended OHP film at this time for the 1280? I've read that conventional wisdom is that Pictorico blocks some UV. I think I also read somewhere that the Canon film puddles with the 1280.

Any other recommendations?

I've been doing in camera negatives for Pd Na2 for two years and am very excited to enlarge some of my medium format negatives. I think I am going to start with the Dan Burkholder method (as I've had the book and disc for two years), but may go on to one of the colorized negatives.

Thanks for any guidance on which OHP will work best for this 1280.
Neal

Click to expand...

Pictorico should work. It is a known entity for making digital negatives with Epson printers, including the 1280, and I would recommend that you start with it.

Sandy



Sandy King

sanking said:

Pictorico should work. It is a known entity for making digital negatives with Epson printers, including the 1280, and I would recommend that you start with it.

Sandy



Sandy King

Click to expand...

Sandy,

Why would you reccomend the 1280 over the 3800? Or is that not what you are suggesting?

Don

Thanks for your feedback, Don. I don't know exactly what dithering is, but guess I'll find out soon enough. I cannot find any Internet reference to "Inkjet Press" OHP. Do you have a source for that?

The 1280 is just a very cheap way to try it to see if I like it. I'm really kind of inept with technology, and the 1280 was a $50 investment to make sure I can follow the steps. I assumed Sandy was taking my printer as a given and just recommending the substrate.

Thanks for the comments. I've seen nice prints from a 1280 neg, so hope I can get something acceptable.
N

wilsonneal said:

Thanks for your feedback, Don. I don't know exactly what dithering is, but guess I'll find out soon enough. I cannot find any Internet reference to "Inkjet Press" OHP. Do you have a source for that?

The 1280 is just a very cheap way to try it to see if I like it. I'm really kind of inept with technology, and the 1280 was a $50 investment to make sure I can follow the steps. I assumed Sandy was taking my printer as a given and just recommending the substrate.

Thanks for the comments. I've seen nice prints from a 1280 neg, so hope I can get something acceptable.
N

Click to expand...

Neal,

For $50 you can't get hurt. The 1280 can make good negatives but at times it has it's flaws.

Sorry I gave the wrong name, it's Inkpress Transparency

http://www.inkjetart.com/cart/press-transparency-film-c-1_753_937_986.html

Don

Thanks!

Don Bryant said:

Sandy,

Why would you reccomend the 1280 over the 3800? Or is that not what you are suggesting?

Don

Click to expand...

No, I was not recommending the 1280 over the 3800. I was recommending Pictorico over any other OHP.

The only advantage the 1280 has over the 3800 is price.

Sandy