Platinum on pigment prints

[colivet]

I was for a long time wanting to make platinum on pigment or pigment on platinum prints. I am aware of Dan Burkholder's work and recently doing a google search I found Jim Collum's work which is displayed here at Hybridphoto.com. Seeing his work gives me a confirmation that this is something I really want to try. I believe in blending the best of analog with the best of digital so here goes the first question. What printer should I use? the 2200 or 2400. The 2400 should print sharper and smoother but don't know how the inks may affect the paper for the next coat of platinum.
Will it have adherence problems or PH incompatibility poblems?


I got much more to learn than what printer to use but I need to replace my defunct printer so that's a start.


Thanks in advance,

Christian

 

[BillSchwab]

What printer should I use? the 2200 or 2400.

I use the 2200 for this. I don't think you will see too much difference in quality between the two for this purpose.

B.

 

[donbga]

I was for a long time wanting to make platinum on pigment or pigment on platinum prints. I am aware of Dan Burkholder's work and recently doing a google search I found Jim Collum's work which is displayed here at Hybridphoto.com. Seeing his work gives me a confirmation that this is something I really want to try. I believe in blending the best of analog with the best of digital so here goes the first question. What printer should I use? the 2200 or 2400. The 2400 should print sharper and smoother but don't know how the inks may affect the paper for the next coat of platinum.
Will it have adherence problems or PH incompatibility poblems?


I got much more to learn than what printer to use but I need to replace my defunct printer so that's a start.


Thanks in advance,

Christian

If you don't have a 2200 already you will have to go with the 2400 since Epson superseded <sp?> the 2200 with the 2400. But as Bill said either should work fine.

I keep hoping that Jim Collum might do an article sharing his technical acumen for this technique.

Don Bryant

 

[BillSchwab]

If you don't have a 2200 already you will have to go with the 2400..

I haven't looked myself, but I have heard there are "refurbished" 2200s out there somewhere. It might be worth a look. I've been looking at the 2400 though and it looks pretty nice.

B

 

[donbga]

I haven't looked myself, but I have heard there are "refurbished" 2200s out there somewhere. It might be worth a look. I've been looking at the 2400 though and it looks pretty nice.

B

Personally I don't reccommend refurbs as they come without a return warranty or any warranty at all (if I'm remembering correctly - at least that is what the Epson weasel words state for refurbed equipment.) Though having said that, Arditos Business Systems ( http://www.arditos.com/refurbished.nxg ) has been reccomended by John Cone and company as a first class shop to have printers rebuild or refurbed. Currently though I see no 2200s there but one could contact them anyway.

But if it were my money I would go with the 2400 new or save a bit more and get a 3800 which will save you a lot of money on ink in the long run. I know one APUG member here locally that has one on order and is expecting delivery in December. So you might have to wait if you go that route.

Best of luck however it goes,

Don

P.S. Just for the record I'm using a 2200 and will use it until it dies or until I have the spare nickels for a 17 inch printer like the 3800.

 

[donbga]

Arditos Business Systems ( http://www.arditos.com/refurbished.nxg ) has been reccomended by John Cone and company as a first class shop to have printers rebuild or refurbed. Currently though I see no 2200s there but one could contact them anyway.

QUOTE]

Looking more carefully on the Ardito site they show 2200s for $699. But isn't that about what a 2400 would cost?

Don Bryant

 

[colivet]

Thanks for the answers. The 3800 is too much for me right now. Will probably go with the 2400.

 

[BillSchwab]

Looking more carefully on the Ardito site they show 2200s for $699. But isn't that about what a 2400 would cost?

Don, My local shops have the 2400 for 849.00 but told me they could go a little less. My 2200 was 699.00 new several years back. If they're getting that for a refurb, they must be still in demand.

Bill

 

[donbga]

Don, My local shops have the 2400 for 849.00 but told me they could go a little less. My 2200 was 699.00 new several years back. If they're getting that for a refurb, they must be still in demand.

Bill

That's the new price, according to the Ardito web site, which I'm assuming they still have in stock.

Personally if I had to choose the 2400 or 2200 *JUST* for making digital negs, I would probably purchase the 2200 since the ink is less expensive and doesn't consume ink as fast as the 2400.

Don

 

[jimcollum]

hi,

sorry i didn't reply earlier. .just got back from a trip to the Salton Sea.

I use the Epson 7600 for mine. I recently picked up a 2400, and though i haven't made negatives on it yet (waiting for PDN 2 to arrive).. i have printed the color layer and coated that (with a negative from the 7600). color's stay on the paper just fine. I suspect the 2400 might produce a better negative as well.. Kevin from Bostick & Sullivan uses a 9800, and says the results are noticably better than the previous 76/9600 printers. He uses just the black inks, and says they do an excellent job. I printed a b/w negative with the 7600, and found some midtone 'noise'.. wasn't as smooth as i'd like. with the PDN system, my negative turns out to be green, and produces very smooth tones throughout.

Thanks Don, for the kind words. I've thought of putting together an article... maybe posting it here on Hybrid. I tend to be a visually oriented person, so words often come with difficulty. But i'll see what i can do

jim

 

[jimcollum]

That's the new price, according to the Ardito web site, which I'm assuming they still have in stock.

Personally if I had to choose the 2400 or 2200 *JUST* for making digital negs, I would probably purchase the 2200 since the ink is less expensive and doesn't consume ink as fast as the 2400.

Don

have to agree with the ink comment... the 2400 pumps through ink much faster than the 2200.

 

[tom_micklin]

Personally if I had to choose the 2400 or 2200 *JUST* for making digital negs, I would probably purchase the 2200 since the ink is less expensive and doesn't consume ink as fast as the 2400.

Don

Great tip Don. When the times comes for me to upgrade my printer, I'll just need something for negatives. Getting a 2200 would save enough cash to buy a lot more film!!!
Regards,
Tom

 

[colivet]

Jim, I am curious as to how you prep the file for your process. It would seem to me that you would need a file in LAB mode and print the lightness channel for the platinum negative, and the A&B channels would provide the colors for the print which would be printed straight on the coating paper.

Is that how you do it?

Thanks, Christian

 

[colivet]

Jim, I am curious as to how you prep the file for your process. It would seem to me that you would need a file in LAB mode and print the lightness channel for the platinum negative, and the A&B channels would provide the colors for the print which would be printed straight on the coating paper.

Is that how you do it?

Thanks, Christian

Ok. Never mind, I figured it out. USE CMYK!

 

[jimcollum]

Ok. Never mind, I figured it out. USE CMYK!

hi.. sorry. for some reason this didn't come up as a new topic with your last response

yes. CMYK. but make sure that you have black generation set to maximum on your cmyk color settings

ctl a to select the K layer, then cut it, then convert the color back to rgb

you can then attach a curves layer to in create/decrease the color density

 

[Bob Carnie]

What size are you folks making these prints?

Would a epson 9600 work for this process?
What I can't get my noggin around is how do you register the platinum with the inkjet.
I have some thoughts on this but a 30"x40" coated sheet would shrink making exact registration difficult and since one would be working with two different platforms the transfer and registration seems cumbersome.
Also what comes first , the colour pigment inks, or the hand coated platinum?
As well the support for this process , would Arches Platine work?
enquiring minds need to know.

 

[jimcollum]

What size are you folks making these prints?

Would a epson 9600 work for this process?
What I can't get my noggin around is how do you register the platinum with the inkjet.
I have some thoughts on this but a 30"x40" coated sheet would shrink making exact registration difficult and since one would be working with two different platforms the transfer and registration seems cumbersome.
Also what comes first , the colour pigment inks, or the hand coated platinum?
As well the support for this process , would Arches Platine work?
enquiring minds need to know.

let's see

yes, an Epson 9600 would work (i use a 7600 myself)

Photoshop has an option in the print dialog box to print registration marks when printing. i use this on both the negative and when i print on the paper. Most of what i print is 11x14 (most often) or 16x20. personally, i'd start smaller.. experiments are expensive

i pre-humidify the paper for smaller sizes 11x14 and less. for larger, i'll 'pre-shrink' the paper. let it soak in water, dry. then humidfy just before printing. this works most (it's not an exact science) time. i've found that in most cases, slight color mis-registration isn't noticable. if you print with a white border around the image (instead of brush strokes up to the image edge), you're more likely to see registration issues on the outside edge of the image.

i use a nuark 26-1k and the vaccum easel makes things a lot easier

you'll need to print the color on the paper first. so far, i haven't found a way of printing on top of the platinum with exact registration from the printers. it's much easier to line up on the vaccum easel.

i haven't used platine... i use cot320, but i don't see why it wouldn't work.

jim

 

[Bob Carnie]

Thanks Jim

All makes sense, I am looking for a Strosser Punch system for Large Prints.
I bought a 30x40 Nuark plate burner *flip top* . If anyone knows where I can get one please let me know.

Jim

Here's something that I have not tried myself and I am wondering if anyone has tried this.
Take the Paper and size or pre shrink like you suggest.
Punch the paper and put register pins on the epson 9600 and basically preset the paper into position. start the machine and take the paper off the registration pins on the epson.
I am thinking this would allow one to do multiple hits on the print and basically build up density and effects on the paper. How many hits I am not sure, but you could prepare skeletan masks to double hit the colours to really accent saturation or contrast? Kind of reminds me of Silk Screening.
I am not convinced that any file can give me the colour gamut and density/contrast that I would like to achieve with only one pass. This is why I am very interested in your process and that of Kerik.
I have not done this myself but I would imagine it would work, what do you think?
As well have you soaked your final product in a gelatin bath to give a protective coat before? I am thinking this would work as well, what do you think?

 

[halesr]

I became interested in this process after seeing Dan Burkholders work and that of Ron Reeder. Ron has "The Pigmented Platinum Manual" online and that is what I followed. I have only done one image using this method, but it made me want to do more. I am going to adjust my process a bit.

I printed the CMY image positive on Arches Platine. I printed the K as a negative on OHP. I then sensitized the Arches Platine color print for palladium printing and registered the negative over the sensitized paper, exposed and developed as I do other palladium prints. It worked fine.

I was not happy with my color printing results, but I have an idea on how to improve that. I printed with my Epson 4000 (sort of old), but what I have. I have developed a custom curve form my negative printing using Reeder's method and QTR.

Here is a link to my first effort. http://www.pbase.com/halesr/image/105847107

Soon there will be more.

I REALLY want to learn more about this process, so I look forward to sharing information with you all.

Rene

 

[Loris Medici]

Christian, not an answer to your question but will mention anyway; maybe you can consider making gum over pt/pd prints, later, if you feel you need more challenge. (Gum is simple in principles but harder to master, compared to pt/pd.) You'll get fully handcrafted hybrid / not-hybrid prints (depending on the negatives) that way. And the looks would be different too; less perfect maybe, but more tactile...

Just a thought.
Regards,
Loris.

I was for a long time wanting to make platinum on pigment or pigment on platinum prints. I am aware of Dan Burkholder's work and recently doing a google search I found Jim Collum's work which is displayed here at Hybridphoto.com. Seeing his work gives me a confirmation that this is something I really want to try...

 

[Ron-san]

I became interested in this process after seeing Dan Burkholders work and that of Ron Reeder.
Rene

Hello Gang-- I just found this thread. And since I used to do a lot of digital color/palladium work, I will offer my biased opinions (my approach is written up on my website www.ronreeder.com but it is based on a Photoshop/printer version that is rather outdated by now).

Personally I expect that any printer that uses the Ultrachrome inks (either K2 or K3) will work fine. By the time you get all the layers and go through the processing baths any fine distinction between print heads will probably be lost. I used Arches Platine and a 2200 and had no complaints. Far as I know, the only essential characteristic of the ink is that is must be able to stand all the processing baths (if you put the color down first).

My approach was to hand color a black and white image in Photoshop (in RGB mode), then change it to CMYK with maximum black separation. The K channel was inverted and used for the pt/pd neg (with appropriate correction curves, of course). The CMY channels were then combined and changed back into RGB mode before printing them onto a sheet of paper. This whole approach is gloriously uncontrolled when it comes to color. The CMY channels are a bit dull and they get rather neon when switched back into RGB. However, this compensates for the fact that I had no profile at all for Arches Platine and printing the color on that paper dulled them back down again. When combined with the pt/pd layer everything miraculously came together and looked pretty good (whew!)

If you lay down the color first, then print the pt/pd over that there are plusses and minuses. On the plus side it is easier to register if you put the color down first (take the time to use the pencil tool in Photoshop and place small black corners on the color layer to provide registration marks for the pt/pd neg that will come next). A minus side of putting the color down firstthe Epson inks tend to act as wicks and suck the pt/pd chemicals down into the paper such that it is nearly impossible to clear them out of the final print. Some batches of Platine are sized so that this is a real problem, others do not seem to have a problem.

If you print the pt/pd first, then you will have a problem getting the color layer to register properly since it will depend upon being able to feed the paper reproducibly though the printer. If I went this route I would first run a sheet of paper through the printer and print just the corner registration marks. Use these to align the pt/pd neg. Then process, dry, and run the paper through the printer again to put down the color. This approach gives you half a chance. HOWEVER, most of the sharpness comes from the pt/pd and the color often can be fuzzed out a bit and still look pretty good.

Frankly, these days I tend to agree with Loris and prefer the look of color put down as multiple layers of gum. Much more laborious, but you get a softer, more funky hand built look which I like.

Cheers, Ron Reeder (ron-san)