Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
It seems I'm not overly content with whatever any camera or medium seems to offer and I frequently search for ways to interfere with a predictable output.
I've always been interested in the idea of a negative created from a digital file and while my end result is pretty strange to say the least it's given me an interesting insight into how various technologies can be overlapped if you're interested ... or bored!
I selected a specific digital image from my D700 shot at a gallery opening a while ago. The photo itself was intriguing because it's of a semi holographic image inside some kind of weird glowing sphere ... I got a large blown highlight in the center of it no matter what angle I photographed it from!
I had some old 4x5 sheets of TX320 laying around that I'd originally used to practice loading film holders in the light for my Crown Graphic when I first got it. I fixed the negs to clear them then washed and dried them. The next step was to invert the selected file in photoshop and attempt to print the inverted image on to a 4x5 sheet in my R2400 to give a genuine negative. It sort of worked but the material of the negative, emulsion side or other, really didn't like the ink and in the high density areas of the negative the ink separated like hammertone paint as it dried!
I scanned the 4x5 in my V700 and although the ink separation looks a little like photographic smallpox I'm not entirely unhappy with the end result because I like the obvious analog look from the negative with the associated scratches and dust and it's interesting that something that started off as holographic image, got converted to digital, then to analog, then back to digital via the scanner. I guess in a wet darkroom environment it could have actually finished up as an analog print!
You probably think this was totally pointless ... but I had fun and learned something!
I've always been interested in the idea of a negative created from a digital file and while my end result is pretty strange to say the least it's given me an interesting insight into how various technologies can be overlapped if you're interested ... or bored!
I selected a specific digital image from my D700 shot at a gallery opening a while ago. The photo itself was intriguing because it's of a semi holographic image inside some kind of weird glowing sphere ... I got a large blown highlight in the center of it no matter what angle I photographed it from!
I had some old 4x5 sheets of TX320 laying around that I'd originally used to practice loading film holders in the light for my Crown Graphic when I first got it. I fixed the negs to clear them then washed and dried them. The next step was to invert the selected file in photoshop and attempt to print the inverted image on to a 4x5 sheet in my R2400 to give a genuine negative. It sort of worked but the material of the negative, emulsion side or other, really didn't like the ink and in the high density areas of the negative the ink separated like hammertone paint as it dried!
I scanned the 4x5 in my V700 and although the ink separation looks a little like photographic smallpox I'm not entirely unhappy with the end result because I like the obvious analog look from the negative with the associated scratches and dust and it's interesting that something that started off as holographic image, got converted to digital, then to analog, then back to digital via the scanner. I guess in a wet darkroom environment it could have actually finished up as an analog print!
You probably think this was totally pointless ... but I had fun and learned something!
gilpen123
Gil
may be a supernatural intervention here .....
Particular
a.k.a. CNNY, disassembler
Hammertone Man-Ray.
helen.HH
To Light & Love ...
Psychedelia... Magic Mushrooms
charjohncarter
Veteran
Try again!
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
There's obviously a clear material available that wouldn't cause this ink separation but I generally prefer to use what's laying around if possible ... I'd be reluctant to actually buy anything. Often it's a strange side effect that appeals to me ... not sure about the hammertone highlights though!
Maybe if I bump the contrast way down before printing it may help.
paulfish4570
Veteran
looks snappy to me ...
gliderbee
Well-known
In a previous life, I was into plastic modelling (aircraft 1/48th, ships 1/350th, ...) and there was a material that could be put in a inktjet printer to print decals yourself.
It was a paperbacked, transparant and very thin material that - after printing with water-resistant ink, could be disengaged from the paperbacking and then applied to the model. I also had solutions to avoid wrinkles, etc ..
Now, if one would print that digital file on it and let that material dry without wrinkles, you might have a fine negative ...
Stefan.
charjohncarter
Veteran
Maybe I should have said 'keep trying' as I like the different effects too.
robklurfield
eclipse
if that's not difficult enough, try doing that while chewing gum. I think it looks cool.
Ducky
Well-known
Office supply stores carry sheets of thin film-like material with a coating on one side to accept ink. They work in any inkjet printer. These are usually 8.5x11 in. and are used to make slides for an overhead projector (remember them). They are cheap and should still be available, maybe on line.
lilmsmaggie
Established
I've always been interested in the idea of a negative created from a digital file and while my end result is pretty strange to say the least it's given me an interesting insight into how various technologies can be overlapped if you're interested ... or bored!
You probably think this was totally pointless ... but I had fun and learned something!
Not necessarily. I've created digital negatives from scanned 4 x 5 negs using a Epson 3800, Quad-Tone Rip, and Pictorio Inkjet Media:
http://www.bostick-sullivan.com/cart/home.php?cat=170
http://www.quadtonerip.com/html/QTRoverview.html
Works pretty darn good with contact printing.
I suggest checking out Ron Reeder: http://www.ronreeder.com/
Have fun
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
After some research I now think I know where I'm headed with this ... thanks largely to lilmsmaggie's links ... thanks for those, much appreciated.
It seems that overhead projection media is the way to go and you can basically get it in all the sizes you want depending on your printer's capabilities. Looking at Ron Reeder's site is very interesting and I may get the book he has available that deals with producing palladium contact prints via this process.
A wet darkroom, but without an enlarger appeals to me for some reason!
It seems that overhead projection media is the way to go and you can basically get it in all the sizes you want depending on your printer's capabilities. Looking at Ron Reeder's site is very interesting and I may get the book he has available that deals with producing palladium contact prints via this process.
A wet darkroom, but without an enlarger appeals to me for some reason!
robklurfield
eclipse
Keith, do this in color and we can revisit the psychedelic 60's.
andredossantos
Well-known
Sparrow
Veteran
... you haven't come across gum arabic printing yet then Keith? I imagine you have lots of acacia trees over there ..........
P.S. ... and lots of UV light
P.S. ... and lots of UV light
cambolt
Green Spotted Nose Turtle
What did you set the paper type to in the print settings?
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
Premium glossy assuming that this type of surface requires the least amount of ink ... maybe that's not so!
cambolt
Green Spotted Nose Turtle
I'm no expert in printing, but those three sets of lines visible in the left hand side of the frame look to me like those I get when I forget to set my paper setting to glossy photo from normal paper.