Yesterday's printing sessions, both negative & print, returned both good and bad messages. The bad part of the message was that I didn't end up with a usable print. The good news being one of the reasons for the first two tries was negative density related. First negative printing offered up a negative so thin you could literally read a newspaper through it. The following adjustments to the image in Paintshop Pro printed a negative so dense it was at the edge of printability. Further readjustment of the image densities (eliminating one of the added adjustments) rendered a negative that was right where I had wanted it to be. The problem, was every time I print this image, large areas in the print become solarized. No other image does this. This one is driving me nuts.
From that, I learned two valuable things. First, my printer is capable of inking the acetate film more than is needed. Best news of all for me. The second learning point is that, for whatever reason, the same images do not look the same from a Mac Book Pro to a PC laptop. Tiff files. That theoretically shouldn't happen. If variant systems display an image in the same manner, with perhaps some variations due to different monitor settings and other variables, but certainly not with different information. Hence, I am having to relearn what a negative should 'look like' to make a printable negative.
As I've mentioned more than once, I am all but color blind to "reflected" red/green colors. And yes I can see transmitted red/green as in traffic signals. Just not so much with more subtle colors on paper. Even taking that into account, I am certainly capable of seeing green on an image presented on a good flat screen monitor. I had been using Lightroom 4 to prepare negatives for printing, learning what an negative image should look like in density, with the spectral density added. Pretty much getting a good print each run, while printing the Tombstone Portfolio. Having now switched over to the PC for imaging work now, things are different.
It is the case now that the negatives I have already prepped in Lightroom, with said green tone, change dramatically when transferred to the PC for viewing. The green is gone and the added densities are no longer there. I can't count the number of hours staring at the ceiling at night pondering this. This isn't supposed to happen. Right? It isn't dementia or the Arizona heat. The reality being I am relearning how these negatives look for printing, on the PC.
And that brings up density curves again. Lightroom and Paintshop do not work the same. In theory or practice. One can of course arrive at the same negative image, if and when one knows how both work. I'm working on that. Paintshop Pro x9 was a $47 upgrade download for my original x3 version. I would categorize Paintshop Pro as Photoshop for digital photography. It has all the elements of Photoshop; layering, masking, same full wrack of imaging tools and options. For digital photographers wanting to print digitally, this is the program. The full program without upgrade is still under $60.
Not so much a plug for the software as to the variance between platforms. Sure would love to see comments on this one, as all are welcome. The bottom line being that after thirty years of working with this craft there is always more to learn. Adapting digital imaging with hand coated printing is a new branch of the old photography tree. New technological means of reaching the same outcome of printing "black and white" images, using historical printing methods. The process works exactly the same, by applying new technology to control the process. From chemical manipulation of the negative to digital manipulation of the negative. Same negative when laying it over precious metals. They don't know the difference.
Soon, there will be new high resolution scans of the 5x7 negatives I have, that will be printed for the next two portfolios to come in 8x10. The density tests have been completed and two developers have shown to be excellent choices for the density range I'm looking for to print on palladium. The 5x7 is ready for the field and my eye is on the Old Barrio of Tucson. Those images will likely also make up a separate portfolio. That's the way it goes. Build a body of work that demonstrates the breadth and depth of one's skill as a fine art printer, using archival methods and museum standards for art. Then, and only then, will there be a chance that the work I produce will see the light of day, and perhaps even generate buyers, if they like what they see. That's the theory, and that's the goal.
No comments:
Post a Comment