I'm using Pictorico OHP and an Epson 3800 to contact print with Palladium. To get clean borders, I'm trying to use rubylith tape to mask the negative. Unfortunately, it seems the tape is making the negative curl profoundly, enough so that the neg no can longer maintain flat, consistent contact with the paper. Click the thumbnail below to view a large example.
I'm using Pictorico OHP and an Epson 3800 to contact print with Palladium. To get clean borders, I'm trying to use rubylith tape to mask the negative. Unfortunately, it seems the tape is making the negative curl profoundly, enough so that the neg no can longer maintain flat, consistent contact with the paper. Click the thumbnail below to view a large example.
Negs need to be perfectly flat while the tape is applied. I used to put the neg on a light table. Tape is a pain. Now I use strips of actual rubylith material that I tack down with Post-it flags. I get a perfectly straight border, I don't waste expensive tape on bad negs, and the rubylith is easily repositionable without leaving any adhesive residue.
Negs need to be perfectly flat while the tape is applied. I used to put the neg on a light table. Tape is a pain. Now I use strips of actual rubylith material that I tack down with Post-it flags. I get a perfectly straight border, I don't waste expensive tape on bad negs, and the rubylith is easily repositionable without leaving any adhesive residue.
Ditto what Phiil said. Plus might you have some issues with your contact printing frame?
You may also wish to extend the canvas and place a small black border around the image. This helps to align the rubylith. Also you may need to double the thickness of the rubylith to absolutely block the UV.
FWIW, I use a vacuum easel, but when I don't I use a high quality contact printing frame.
Consider using the rubylith on the glass of the printing frame as well as thick as possible paper under the coated paper to sandwich that against the negative. The black border is helpful but in my experience it doesn't entirely block the UV so the rubylith is the key. You can also place black (opaque) draftsman tape over the mask you have created. a few years ago I printed a limited edition of 14 prints each of 4 images for another photographer who would only accept clean borders and that was the technique that worked.
Consider using the rubylith on the glass of the printing frame as well as thick as possible paper under the coated paper to sandwich that against the negative. The black border is helpful but in my experience it doesn't entirely block the UV so the rubylith is the key. You can also place black (opaque) draftsman tape over the mask you have created. a few years ago I printed a limited edition of 14 prints each of 4 images for another photographer who would only accept clean borders and that was the technique that worked.
What really works well is thin guage black vinyl (I think it's vinyl). It's the same material that is sold by betterscanning.com for making film masks for the wet scanning accessory they sell. Very effective and reuseable if repeat your image sizes frequently.
You may also wish to extend the canvas and place a small black border around the image. This helps to align the rubylith. Also you may need to double the thickness of the rubylith to absolutely block the UV.
FWIW, I use a vacuum easel, but when I don't I use a high quality contact printing frame.
Extending the canvas with a small black (or opaque of the color of the negative) line (about .2" wide) around the image is my technique. Then I just put the negative flat on a light table and apply a wider border of 1" rubylith, just making sure to tape over the canvas line. The line makes applying the tape much less critical and a lot easier.
Thanks for the suggestions, everyone. I switched to applying the rubylith tape to separate acetate mask that I overlay on top of the digineg. I also added a new pressure bar to the back of my contact printing frame to help flatten out the center section. So far, so good.