Starter kit for hybrid processes

At some point I'd like to get into hybrid processes, but am a bit unclear as to where to start. I'd like to do alternative processes from digital files, either scans or from a digital camera. Presumably, I need some kind of printer, software, and knowledge on how to get the file to a contact-printable negative. I'll probably start with cyanotype since I understand that is one of the more easily accessible and affordable alternative processes, but at some point I'd like to try some others (carbon, platinum, etc.).

I don't plan on going large - I would be happy with 8x10 prints, though I could see doing an 11x14 print every once in a while. I won't be doing any thing larger than that. Is there a recommended 8x10 printer for this?

A recommendation for a printing material would be good too, as well as a 'system' for generating the neg with appropriate densities.

I'm sure this stuff is covered somewhere for a novice, but I didn't see a consolidated resource.

Tim Gray said:

At some point I'd like to get into hybrid processes, but am a bit unclear as to where to start. I'd like to do alternative processes from digital files, either scans or from a digital camera. Presumably, I need some kind of printer, software, and knowledge on how to get the file to a contact-printable negative. I'll probably start with cyanotype since I understand that is one of the more easily accessible and affordable alternative processes, but at some point I'd like to try some others (carbon, platinum, etc.).

I don't plan on going large - I would be happy with 8x10 prints, though I could see doing an 11x14 print every once in a while. I won't be doing any thing larger than that. Is there a recommended 8x10 printer for this?

A recommendation for a printing material would be good too, as well as a 'system' for generating the neg with appropriate densities.

I'm sure this stuff is covered somewhere for a novice, but I didn't see a consolidated resource.

Click to expand...

Learning to make consistently good digital negatives can be quite a challenge. There are a lot of resources on the internet and books that cover this. A workshop will get you bootstrapped a lot faster. Do an internet search for "digital negatives" and/or "digital negatives workshops."

I've read over a bunch of resources, and to be honest, it's not overly helpful. Many of them are a couple years out of date, so there are either better methods available or the printers/film/ink sets used aren't currently made.

Tim Gray said:

I've read over a bunch of resources, and to be honest, it's not overly helpful. Many of them are a couple years out of date, so there are either better methods available or the printers/film/ink sets used aren't currently made.

Click to expand...

Phil has given a concise and helpful reply. If you spend some time reading through the posts here you will get a broad understanding of the options available.

It maybe that taking a workshop as Phil suggests will save you time and money.

It might be helpful to tell us what your budget is and perhaps we can provide a more helpful answer.

You can also search through the Gray Area archives on APUG and get a sense of the options available to you.

You may also wish to visit some of the more Alt specific forums such as Sandy Kings yahoo carbon forum or the B&S forum.

Any route or path you take for a solution requires research, sweat equity, time, and money on your part. The paths available to you have been blazed relatively quickly and most who follow are seat of the pants types (coupled with a lot of past experience in alternative process printing) willing to learn as they go but not after they have become grounded in the fundamentals of the whole process if they aren't seasoned alt printers.

Ron Reeder wrote his book a couple of years ago and he stated in the book that more than likely his book was going to be obsolete by the time it was published. It was but his efforts and others like him aren't worthless.

Slow down and take the time to read and ask targeted specific questions.

What books on alternative processes have you read? Might help if you pick up a general reference like Christina Anderson's modern jewel, "Alternative Processes Condensed".

What is your geographic location? There maybe someone close by that might be willing and able to hold your hand for a while.

Don Bryant

I thought I both provided my background and asked three concise questions:
1) whats a good 8x10 printer for this?
2) whats a good print material for this?
3) is there a recommended software/system to help determine necessary tones for the negative for contact printing?

I will search more and come back to discuss when I am already doing it as opposed to trying to start. Thanks for the lengthy reply.

Tim Gray said:

I thought I both provided my background and asked three concise questions:
1) whats a good 8x10 printer for this?
2) whats a good print material for this?
3) is there a recommended software/system to help determine necessary tones for the negative for contact printing?

I will search more and come back to discuss when I am already doing it as opposed to trying to start. Thanks for the lengthy reply.

Click to expand...

1) My personal experience:
Epson R800/R1800 make excellent negatives. Both are out of production.
I am still using an R1800.
Epson R200 made OK negatives. Long out of production. Don't bother.
Epson 1280 made good negatives. Long out of production. Don't bother.
Epson 1400 (Claria ink) didn't provide sufficient UV blocking during my brief
testing.
Epson 3800 makes very good negatives. Out of production but can still be
found, and 3880 is a later upgrade.

2) Pictorico OHP, Inkpress Transparency Film, and Arista OHP are equivalent
and make excellent negatives. I prefer Inkpress because it is available in
50 sheet boxes and a larger selection of sizes. Ultrafine Crystal Clear
Universal Ink Jet Film Transparency is less expensive but doesn't hold
ink as well or dry as quickly as the above OHPs.


3) Ask 5 people and you will get 5 different answers. Maybe more.
Some available tools/methods: Quadtone RIP (QTR, there are lots of
different workflows), Precision Digital Negatives (PDN, a complete system),
RNP-Array, Dan Burkholder, Ron Reeder, Mike Ware. Lots of folks cobble
together a solution using pieces of various tools combined with their own
techniques.
If you decide to use QTR then you will need a supported Epson printer.

Personally, I have found a reflection densitometer invaluable for creating correction curves for digital negatives. A UV transmission densitometer can be really helpful, too.

As Don said, making digital negatives requires patience and persistence.
Current printers and ink sets were not created for this purpose so there
are no OEM out-of-box solutions. It's just not that easy. Stick with it and you will reap the rewards.

Tim Gray said:

I thought I both provided my background and asked three concise questions:
1) whats a good 8x10 printer for this?
2) whats a good print material for this?
3) is there a recommended software/system to help determine necessary tones for the negative for contact printing?

I will search more and come back to discuss when I am already doing it as opposed to trying to start. Thanks for the lengthy reply.

Click to expand...

Tim your questions are a little to general.

Now I do know you know how to scan your film based on your activity in other forums. So I don't consider you a neophyte which is a plus.

How many Benjamins can you afford to spend on a printer? Start with that and work backwards. Pictorico, Arista, Inkpress are the three main types of OHP used in the US. Europe has Agfa. All work relatively the same.

Vist Mark Nelson's website, Precision Digital Negatives. It costs $75 to get into the game but has arguably the most flexible and precise method of making digi negs, but also requires MS Office for Version 1. Version 2 is $35 more but requires no extra software, it's all included. So that's about $115 for software, but very potent flexible software.

QTR requires a specific Epson printer - ones that are supported by the author of QTR - Roy Harrington. QTR costs $50 and there are lots of sample curves to help get you started.

Both QTR and PDN and be a little pissy to use until you become familiar with the products. And there seem to be endless places to make mistakes along the way even when you have all of the require tools.

If you want to use HP or Canon then you will need to see if those ink sets are useful for digital negatives intended for alt process.

A reflection densitometer is helpful as well as a UV densitometer. Neither are necessary but step tablets are.

Don

Thanks guys, this gives me something to work with. I'll spend some time reading up on PDN and QTR and see which looks like a better fit.

As far as printer price, I'd like to keep it to a couple hundred of dollars, like under $500. If there is a compelling reason to go over that, I would be willing to. It sounds like there are compelling reasons to stick with Epson.

I do have some experience with photography. I shoot film and scan and wet print my stuff. I started off with a DSLR a couple years ago and know my way around photoshop.

Tim Gray said:

Thanks guys, this gives me something to work with. I'll spend some time reading up on PDN and QTR and see which looks like a better fit.

As far as printer price, I'd like to keep it to a couple hundred of dollars, like under $500. If there is a compelling reason to go over that, I would be willing to. It sounds like there are compelling reasons to stick with Epson.

I do have some experience with photography. I shoot film and scan and wet print my stuff. I started off with a DSLR a couple years ago and know my way around photoshop.

Click to expand...

It's worth buying PDN just for the manual since it tells you everything you need to know about digital negatives. Useful no matter what system you use, and well written, too.
A current model Epson for $200 (even $500) that works well for negatives might be a stretch. The 1400 can be had refurbished for under $200 and it's a 13" printer, but my initial tests were disappointing.

It's a shame Epson doesn't make a 'serious' smaller sized printer.

Tim Gray said:

It's a shame Epson doesn't make a 'serious' smaller sized printer.

Click to expand...

It is a shame that no one makes one. All the desktop printers are disposable toys created to drive sales of paper and ink.

I'm in the same boat as you Tim, I have a Canon scanner that may well do for now but need a new printer.

My old Epson Photo EX clogged up finally last year (it was someone else's cast off) and wouldn't have been good enough anyway for neg making, but I'm surprised just how much larger replacements are.

My main concern is getting a printer good enough that is also economic on inks.

Ian

Ian Grant said:

My main concern is getting a printer good enough that is also economic on inks.

Ian

Click to expand...

This issue was one of many that has put me off digital negative making for the time being. I came to the conclusion that a printer along the lines of the Epson 3880 (1000 GBP - http://www.jigsaw24.com/product-details/x541ava/epson-stylus-pro-3880-a2+-89-colour-inkjet-printer ) is needed in order to achieve reasonable production costs.

Tom

Tom Kershaw said:

This issue was one of many that has put me off digital negative making for the time being. I came to the conclusion that a printer along the lines of the Epson 3880 (1000 GBP - http://www.jigsaw24.com/product-details/x541ava/epson-stylus-pro-3880-a2+-89-colour-inkjet-printer ) is needed in order to achieve reasonable production costs.

Tom

Click to expand...

I went for the 3880. Don't plan on making a huge number of A3plus sized prints, but the economy of ink gets better with larger models and it's nice to have the option of going big.

The printer has been my biggest investment for getting into alt printing (already have a computer and photoshop). With a bit of patience and time I built an exposure unit quite cheaply, and worked with heavy glass until a vacuum frame became available at a fair price.

Tom Kershaw said:

This issue was one of many that has put me off digital negative making for the time being. I came to the conclusion that a printer along the lines of the Epson 3880 (1000 GBP - http://www.jigsaw24.com/product-details/x541ava/epson-stylus-pro-3880-a2+-89-colour-inkjet-printer ) is needed in order to achieve reasonable production costs.

Tom

Click to expand...

Well there are good second hand bargains to be had as many people constantly upgrade, I'm not up on current printer models but saw the quality from an older S/H Epson model last week.

I'm not too worried about going larger than A3+ at the moment and I have contingency plans for odd larger prints if needs be. I'll PM you later.

My plans won't really progress until I'm back in the UK in a few weeks, printer prices are much higher here in Turkey as there's a high Import tax as well as VAT.

I'm astounded though at the quality of digital negatives and it's unfortunately now the most economic & controllable route to take.

Now to sort through the printer specs

Ian

Tom Kershaw said:

This issue was one of many that has put me off digital negative making for the time being. I came to the conclusion that a printer along the lines of the Epson 3880 (1000 GBP - http://www.jigsaw24.com/product-details/x541ava/epson-stylus-pro-3880-a2+-89-colour-inkjet-printer ) is needed in order to achieve reasonable production costs.

Tom

Click to expand...

Ink is ridiculously expensive, but my guess is that it is still far cheaper to make a digital neg than an equivalently sized large format in-camera neg, especially if you do a full-cost analysis.

Ian Grant said:

My main concern is getting a printer good enough that is also economic on inks.

Ian

Click to expand...

That won't be with any of the desktop printers out today. The wide body/carriage is where you start seeing a little economy.

Don

Interesting. For $1k I could get a 4x5 setup. Ha.

Tim Gray said:

Interesting. For $1k I could get a 4x5 setup. Ha.

Click to expand...

Tim,

Take a look at Arditos here:

http://www.arditos.com/

They are highly regarded refurbishers of Epson equipment. Jon Cone of the Ink jet Mall recommends them for bringing Epson printers into close tolerance to squeeze maximum performance from their (IJM) inksets.

You may wish to pickup an Epson 2200 for making digital negatives. The 2200 has a great ink set for alternative processes. Or you may wish to see if they have an Epson 1800 in stock. I'm certain that the 2200 is supported by QTR, and the 1800 maybe also.

The Epson C88 printer is an $88 printer available for purchase directly from Epson.com. Used in conjunction Mark Nelson's Precision Digital Negatives or the PDN knock-off RNP Array by Michael Kotch Schulte:

Dead Link Removed

So with that you can get into the digital negative game for about $100. The C88 won't make as smooth negatives as it's big brothers will but it will give you an opportunity to test the waters with out too much financial risk.

BTW FYI, the cyanotype process is relatively simple but it isn't easy to get superior prints until you have practiced for a while. So don't start printing cyanotypes Eyes Wide Shut!

Good luck,

Don Bryant

Atlex currently offering 3880 for $799 with rebate - just got the flier. As this includes several hundred $-worth of ink, it's a pretty good deal.
QTR does support the 1800.

Can't agree more. Cyanotype is simple and cheap, but to be able to get full potential / perfect results from the process (many don't - perhaps because they don't expect much from the process and/or don't realize its real potential) is a real challenge. It's a very good process to "tame" yourself and familiarize with the general modus operandi of many similar (iron) processes. Believe me, print out palladium printing will look easy to you after cyanotype... (Both because it's really easy and because cyanotype will make you learn a lot and you won't do mistakes when starting to play with relatively expensive noble metal salts.)

Regards,
Loris.

Don Bryant said:

...
BTW FYI, the cyanotype process is relatively simple but it isn't easy to get superior prints until you have practiced for a while. So don't start printing cyanotypes Eyes Wide Shut!
...

Click to expand...

That's what attracts me to cyanotype as a starting point. It is relatively cheap and will be a good way to hone my skills. I also really like the way a tea-toned cyanotype looks.

Thanks for the pointers on the printers. I'll investigate some of these refurbs.

Tim Gray said:

...
I also really like the way a tea-toned cyanotype looks.
....

Click to expand...

Yep, me too:



Good luck, and happy printing (in advance...)
Loris.

In layman's terms what's the difference between the Epson 220o & 1800 ?

I want a printer for Digital negs for Plat/Palladium mainly, but maybe B&W & Colour inkjets as well

Ian

Ian Grant said:

In layman's terms what's the difference between the Epson 2200 & 1800 ?

Ian

Click to expand...

Ian,

1) The 1800 has a smaller ink droplet size, about 1.8 pico-liter, which produces finer detail. However the inks used for the 1800 aren't quite as good at blocking UV light as the 2200 inks are. The 1800 is out of production, BTW. It's probably the best desktop printer made by Epson for making negatives for gelatin silver prints.

2) The 2200 is out of production too but had a very good ink set for blocking UV light and produced very smooth tones. Unfortunately these printers tended to produce banding as they aged. The ink carts are larger than the 1800 making the ink slightly less expensive.

Don Bryant