Printers for digital negatives for Kallitypes?

[MurrayMinchin]

I use a BLB exposure table, designed for screen printing. I also use a plate burner, also used in the screen printing industry. That one is used for carbon transfer. I have a set time, depending on process. Exposures are always consistent. I've never used a UV measuring device.

Ahhh, good to know.

I've got eight UV LED light bars. Our battery backup for the computers has input voltage displayed...it can be anywhere between 116v to 123v because we get our power through the local aluminum smelter before it gets fed into the grid. (Everybody in town has to occasionally adjust their electric clocks) My concern would be light output variances due to input voltage differences and/or the LED's changing output over time.

Don't know if these factors will come into play or not...don't want to be changing negative curves or paper chemistry when the root problem is light output. It'll be like chasing ghosts!!!!

 

[fgorga]

Beginners luck!

Now that I have your ear...what kind of UV light source do you have? Do you expose your prints by a set time on the clock and if so, do the exposures vary for any reason? By inspection? Or do you use a UV light measurement device? (Have my eye on a measuring device, but it'll chew through a good portion of my budget).

You don't need a UV measurement device if you are going to use an artificial light source. Artificial sources are generally quite consistent in their output, so a timed exposure works just fine.

As for light sources, the simplest thing these days are prewired LED strips such as these... https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B071NT6189. I am sure many other similar things will work.

One can mount these in a simple wood box, no fancy ventilation or electrical work needed.

I have four of these strips mounted in a box large enough for a 16x20 inch printing frame. They end up about 6 inches off the glass of the frame. Exposure time is 7 min for cyanotype and 10 min for salted-paper. I haven't tried kallitype, so I can't say for them. The LEDs are cheap enough and generate so little heat that I could put in another four strips if I wanted.

BLB light sources work just fine for most alt processes. However if you want to do photopolymer gravure, you will need a light source that has a lower wavelength... 360ish nm vs. the 395 of BLB. The shorter wavelength devices are much more expensive and much more dangerous to human health than BLB.

 

[fgorga]

Ahhh, good to know.

I've got eight UV LED light bars. Our battery backup for the computers has input voltage displayed...it can be anywhere between 116v to 123v because we get our power through the local aluminum smelter before it gets fed into the grid. (Everybody in town has to occasionally adjust their electric clocks) My concern would be light output variances due to input voltage differences and/or the LED's changing output over time.

Don't know if these factors will come into play or not...don't want to be changing negative curves or paper chemistry when the root problem is light output. It'll be like chasing ghosts!!!!

I don't think, but I don't know for sure that those line voltage differences will matter. LEDs are low voltage, direct current devices, so you won't actually be feeding them your line voltage, as there will be some conversion in the strips.

If worse comes to worse, you could always plug you LEDs into a regulated power supply such as your battery back up! Back up supplies are probably cheaper that a UV sensor.

 

[MurrayMinchin]

You don't need a UV measurement device if you are going to use an artificial light source. Artificial sources are generally quite consistent in their output, so a timed exposure works just fine.

As for light sources, the simplest thing these days are prewired LED strips such as these... https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B071NT6189. I am sure many other similar things will work...

Those are similar to what I have. (Got the idea from Tim Layton's website).

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

You don't need a UV measurement device if you are going to use an artificial light source. Artificial sources are generally quite consistent in their output, so a timed exposure works just fine.

As for light sources, the simplest thing these days are prewired LED strips such as these... https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B071NT6189. I am sure many other similar things will work.

One can mount these in a simple wood box, no fancy ventilation or electrical work needed.

I have four of these strips mounted in a box large enough for a 16x20 inch printing frame. They end up about 6 inches off the glass of the frame. Exposure time is 7 min for cyanotype and 10 min for salted-paper. I haven't tried kallitype, so I can't say for them. The LEDs are cheap enough and generate so little heat that I could put in another four strips if I wanted.

BLB light sources work just fine for most alt processes. However if you want to do photopolymer gravure, you will need a light source that has a lower wavelength... 360ish nm vs. the 395 of BLB. The shorter wavelength devices are much more expensive and much more dangerous to human health than BLB.

I imagine a kallitype exposure with your unit would be quite short, if your cyanotypes are only 7 minutes long. With BLB, my kallitypes are 8 to 15 min depending on developer. For cyanotypes, 25 min!

 

[MurrayMinchin]

I don't think, but I don't know for sure that those line voltage differences will matter. LEDs are low voltage, direct current devices, so you won't actually be feeding them your line voltage, as there will be some conversion in the strips.

If worse comes to worse, you could always plug you LEDs into a regulated power supply such as your battery back up! Back up supplies are probably cheaper that a UV sensor.

Good points...and much cheaper than a UV light measuring device. That only leaves output changing over time due to age, such as LED's drifting in terms of output or maybe the clear plastic (polycarbonate?) covers over the LED's changing properties.

I used to use a ZONE VI compensating enlarging timer to control exposure drift from my Cold Light, and a Zone VI Compensating Development Timer to account for temperature changes in my darkroom during printing sessions. They made making consistent/predictable prints possible because they eliminated the effects of light output changes and/or developer activity changes due to temperature swings during a printing session.

Hard to give up that kind of consistency when you're used to it...there are enough variables in alt printing as it is.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

I stuck the print from that negative in the Gallery...

 

[MurrayMinchin]

I stuck the print from that negative in the Gallery...

You got a "Holy crap, I like that" from my wife. High praise!

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

You got a "Holy crap, I like that" from my wife. High praise!

Please thank her for me!

 

[tnp651]

Thanks for the tip.

This stuff? https://www.willox.com/supMAT.php

In the long run, does it pay to pinch pennies on digital negative substrate when doing first ever tests with alt processes? Is there a chance max black times or textured whites or any number of other factors might be compromised?

I've been testing Fixxons against Pictorico for a YouTube video. Fixxons works just fine and is quite a bit cheaper. I've used both their digital negative film and the even-cheaper Fixxons Waterproof, intended for screen printers. I'm getting good results with it as well.
Tom Nelson

 

[MurrayMinchin]

I've been testing Fixxons against Pictorico for a YouTube video. Fixxons works just fine and is quite a bit cheaper. I've used both their digital negative film and the even-cheaper Fixxons Waterproof, intended for screen printers. I'm getting good results with it as well.
Tom Nelson

Thanks...looking forward to watching the video.

 

[tnp651]

Thanks...looking forward to watching the video.

 

[MurrayMinchin]

Thanks for the heads up...gave that one a thumbs up right away!

 

[Anton Savitskiy]

I've only ever used Epson printers, such as 4000 (had for 10 years and finally died), two 3800's (of one I still use for large negatives up to 17 inches across), and my favourite, the P400. It does up to 13 inches wide which in most cases, is big enough. It also has smaller ink droplets compared to the 3800, which translates into smoother gradient. You might be able to pick up a refurbished one, like I did. I bought refillable cartridges from inkowl. I've converted them all to print black (no matt), except for one which is yellow, as it's an excellent UV blocker.
I think the P800 is the latest model. Most Epson printers allow the use of QTR (Quadtone Rip) to aid in the making of digi negs. It is what I use for Kallitype, Carbon Transfer, gum, and a few more alt processes.

I followed you on P400 related carbon thread on groups.io and noticed both you and Sandy King went that road with 3rd party inks to Y and all PK ink set. I posted similar question there as well.

I have a P400 and initially thought to go with Piezograhy all grey inks, because I find their concept of using different black shades to get smoother tonal rendition quite reasonable. Although I'm not sure how much impact it implies practically. Recently I discovered that there are 3rd party "ultrachrome" inks not just PK, but Light Black and even Light Light Black. So that't made me wonder. Theoretically, there's a possibility to make own ink set that could produce quite smooth tonal rendition - say, 2xY, 2xPK, 2xLK, 2xLLK - a kind of own "K4" ink set. I know that Richard Boutwell's system on original Epson 10 ink set uses primarily these shades of black and yellow.

I can see that you and Sandy King are using Y and just one similar PK - how it goes in terms of tonal smoothness? Have you tried any other (LK or LLK, or may be some other) kind of 3rd party black shades?

Regards,
Anton

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

I followed you on P400 related carbon thread on groups.io and noticed both you and Sandy King went that road with 3rd party inks to Y and all PK ink set. I posted similar question there as well.

I have a P400 and initially thought to go with Piezograhy all grey inks, because I find their concept of using different black shades to get smoother tonal rendition quite reasonable. Although I'm not sure how much impact it implies practically. Recently I discovered that there are 3rd party "ultrachrome" inks not just PK, but Light Black and even Light Light Black. So that't made me wonder. Theoretically, there's a possibility to make own ink set that could produce quite smooth tonal rendition - say, 2xY, 2xPK, 2xLK, 2xLLK - a kind of own "K4" ink set. I know that Richard Boutwell's system on original Epson 10 ink set uses primarily these shades of black and yellow.

I can see that you and Sandy King are using Y and just one similar PK - how it goes in terms of tonal smoothness? Have you tried any other (LK or LLK, or may be some other) kind of 3rd party black shades?

Regards,
Anton

Tonal smoothness is quite nice. Mainly due to smaller ink droplets compared to my old 4000 and 3800. I'm using 6 Pk cartridges, one yellow, and one LLK. The GL cartridge is LLK. I've only used the stuff from Ink Owl.

 

[Anton Savitskiy]

Tonal smoothness is quite nice. Mainly due to smaller ink droplets compared to my old 4000 and 3800. I'm using 6 Pk cartridges, one yellow, and one LLK. The GL cartridge is LLK. I've only used the stuff from Ink Owl.

Thank you for your reply. Just one LLK but no LK? Why LLK? Is it a result from some testing involving LK, which has shown that it's useless or just that's the way? Probably Y serves as LK?

I also wonder if UV blocking inks for screen printing could be the choice.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Thank you for your reply. Just one LLK but no LK? Why LLK? Is it a result from some testing involving LK, which has shown that it's useless or just that's the way? Probably Y serves as LK?

I also wonder if UV blocking inks for screen printing could be the choice.

Because I have a large bottle of LLK sitting around, and no LK...but if I had both, I'd probably use the LLK. It being a lighter black than LK it could give more subtle control of highlights... I kept one yellow for it's excellent UV blocking ability.
I've never really been fussy about inks... well maybe a little when it came to ridiculous high price. If I made digital prints, I would probably go for the expensive stuff... but I'm only making negatives. The cheap stuff I use is absolutely fine. I've been using it for many years. I'd rather spend my money on good papers, water colours, and film.

 

[nmp]

Tonal smoothness is quite nice. Mainly due to smaller ink droplets compared to my old 4000 and 3800. I'm using 6 Pk cartridges, one yellow, and one LLK. The GL cartridge is LLK. I've only used the stuff from Ink Owl.

Hi, Andy: So do you use all 6 PK's in combination with the Y and LLK at a time or only a subset and let others be dormant? I am not sure I follow the rationale for so many PK's.

Curious....

:Niranjan.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Hi, Andy: So do you use all 6 PK's in combination with the Y and LLK at a time or only a subset and let others be dormant? I am not sure I follow the rationale for so many PK's.

Curious....

:Niranjan.

I use them all at the same time. I did run it with the cyan cartridge off (PK) as its nozzle was plugged, but it eventually unplugged itself. I've always liked Y for its UV blocking ability... but if I ever ran out of it, I wouldn't hesitate to turn it off in QTR, and slightly increase the other PKs...or just refill the Y with PK. I've done it before. I like the LLK ink as I can use it for tweaking highlight density in the negative. I use most inks when I'm making negatives for carbon transfer. I've only ever used a printer for making digital negatives, not for making prints, so they could all be PK at the end of the day.

 

[nmp]

I use them all at the same time. I did run it with the cyan cartridge off (PK) as its nozzle was plugged, but it eventually unplugged itself. I've always liked Y for its UV blocking ability... but if I ever ran out of it, I wouldn't hesitate to turn it off in QTR, and slightly increase the other PKs...or just refill the Y with PK. I've done it before. I like the LLK ink as I can use it for tweaking highlight density in the negative. I use most inks when I'm making negatives for carbon transfer. I've only ever used a printer for making digital negatives, not for making prints, so they could all be PK at the end of the day.

I am assuming you divide up the ink loading among all the PK's, so instead of using X% of one PK you would use, say, X/6% for each of the 6 PK's. Is there any benefit of doing this way (1 vs 6 PK's) in terms of tone smoothness, graininess etc or you are simply giving all heads the exercise so they don't clog/dry up.

:Niranjan.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

I am assuming you divide up the ink loading among all the PK's, so instead of using X% of one PK you would use, say, X/6% for each of the 6 PK's. Is there any benefit of doing this way (1 vs 6 PK's) in terms of tone smoothness, graininess etc or you are simply giving all heads the exercise so they don't clog/dry up.

:Niranjan.

PK's are pretty much divvied up the same (at least they are for gum...I can't remember for kallitypes, carbon, and cyanotype) Y is a bit more. LLK is a bit less. When the PK in the C cartridge conked out, I distributed the ink evenly to the other PK cartridges.

 

[nmp]

PK's are pretty much divvied up the same (at least they are for gum...I can't remember for kallitypes, carbon, and cyanotype) Y is a bit more. LLK is a bit less. When the PK in the C cartridge conked out, I distributed the ink evenly to the other PK cartridges.

Thanks Andrew for those extra details. I am actively thinking about what to do with my P400 - I do want to retain the color photo printing capability so I doubt I will pursue all PK route. I also have a mothballed refurbished 1430 that I am looking fo put to a good use. Too many projects, too little time...

:Niranjan.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Thanks Andrew for those extra details. I am actively thinking about what to do with my P400 - I do want to retain the color photo printing capability so I doubt I will pursue all PK route. I also have a mothballed refurbished 1430 that I am looking fo put to a good use. Too many projects, too little time...

:Niranjan.

My pleasure! I should add that when I first got the printer (it was refurbished by Epson) it came with half full cartridges. I did make some decent kallitype prints with a modest amount of the coloured inks... but had to use a tremendous amount of PK and Y to get decent UV blocking for carbon transfer. Cheers!

andy

 

[Anton Savitskiy]

Tonal smoothness is quite nice. Mainly due to smaller ink droplets compared to my old 4000 and 3800. I'm using 6 Pk cartridges, one yellow, and one LLK. The GL cartridge is LLK. I've only used the stuff from Ink Owl.

Ink Owl has bulk inks divided by Ultrachrome K2, K3, HD and so on. They have different part numbers, I wonder if inks are the same and do they have different UV blocking. Assuming the use of LK and LLK it's not Ultrachrome Hi-Gloss (which the P400 sports) compatible inks. What type of inks should one use for the P400?

 

[nmp]

I also wonder if UV blocking inks for screen printing could be the choice.

I have wondered about that too. Some of these inks have a very high UV blocking density. For example, InkjetMall has UV45 ink that has density of 4.5. Why not just fill one cartridge and be done - no matter what the alt process demands. It would be nice if someone had a first-hand experience.

:Niranjan.