Quadtone quagmire

[chris_raney]

<p>I'm going to confess that perhaps a combination of age, marginal computer literacy and an aversion to narrative-poor jargon has made creating acceptable, digital, black & white negatives an impossible task for me. I've invested in Reeder's and Hinkel's <em>Digital Negatives</em> book, downloaded and purchased the Quadtone RIP program, stocked-up on Pictorico OHP and even ran across a nice bargain on a lovingly used Epson 2200 printer. But I'm stumped into understanding how all of this rocket science converges into creating anything better than the lousy, fuzzy negatives I've seen so far. </p>

<p>What I need is a competent video tutorial. Either that or a willing genius who will engage in a messaging dialog for all of my mewling questions. </p>

[john_a5]

<p>Fuzzy? Printing on the right side of the stuff??? Seriously though, when do you see it as fuzzy? Is it when you enlarge it, loupe it or does it just look fuzzy looking at it with your eyes, unaided.</p>

<p>The odd thing about inkjet prints is that they are not sharp in the sense we are accustomed to with a silver negative or print. The ink spreads but that is not visible to our naked eye. Look at any inkjet print magnified and it is not critically sharp--it is fuzzy. I first noticed this shooting digital copy shots. The images made from silver prints could easily be blown up beyond the print's size but never the shots of inkjet prints.</p>

[chris_raney]

<p>By fuzzy I mean they're ethereal-looking and not sharp. But I know they can look sharp simply from the examples in the Reeder & Hinkel book. I just wish they had spent a bit more time on describing silver prints. The book is mis-titled, in my opinion. It's more of a primer on platinum-palladium printing.</p>

<p>Also, they give rather short shrift to Photoshop programs. They say QuadTone RIP is compatible with essentially all of their programs. Yeah, sure, if you're talking about the ones that cost hundred of dollars, it appears. So my little Photoshop 7 that came with my scanner won't work? So I'm looking at dropping <em>more</em> money on a fancier Photoshop program? </p>

<p>And yes, John, I am printing on the correct side of the OHP stuff. And I purchased it because from what I've read the 'white' Pictorico product isn't as desirable. As you can see I'm simply floundering for a unified explanation of this process. </p>

[Robin Smith]

<p>I don't understand what you mean by a digital negative. Do you mean a scan of black and white negative film, or do you mean a RAW digital image for black and white printing, or something else?</p>

[sarah_fox]

<p>Maybe you're trying to print out an inkjet negative image (with the Epson printer), so that you can reverse it and produce a silver positive through contact printing (i.e. in the darkroom)? I'm confused too.</p>

<p>When most of us refer to a "digital negative," we're talking about a RAW image (a computer file). These RAW files come straight from our digital cameras. I suppose some people might also consider image files from scans of physical film negatives to be "digital negatives," but in that case I would think only the physical negative could be called the "negative." In all of this, the true meaning of "negative" has been lost/forgotten -- literally an image in which dark is light and light is dark. </p>

<p>There is another level of "digital negative," in which proprietary RAW files (e.g. Canon's CR2 files or Nikon's NEF files) are converted to another standard format (e.g. Adobe's PNG, as I recall). In any event, the most common modern meaning of "digital negative" is the original, unaltered digital computer file that a digital camera produces.</p>

[chris_raney]

<p>I'm sorry. Let me qualify things: I'm talking about developed film (Tri-X) that has been scanned, digitally corrected, and then the image being printed upon Pictorico OHP to make a contact negative I can print in my darkroom. </p>

[Robin Smith]

<p>Oh my: well god knows! Interesting. When you get some results please show them here!</p>

[don_bryant2]

<p>What Chris is asking about is nothing new. Chris check into the Yahoo QTR forum and do some reading there. Clay Harmon has an excellent free pdf on hi web site and recent discussions on the QTR forum highlight some of the issues people have using inkjet digital negatives.</p>

<p>And if you like and use QTR pay Roy Harrington the $50 so he will continue supporting the product.</p>

<p>Of course QTR wasn't originally created for inkjet negatives but it can produce excellent beautiful results.</p>

<p>Also look up Ron Reeder's website as well for more information.<br>

If you are working just with silver gelatin paper (ahite light printing vs UV for alt. processes) you can use glossy RC inkjet paper as your negative substrate. That's an inexpensive option to learn with. Once you understand the methodology, switch to Pictorico white film (expensive but the product has virtually zero dot gain). From there out you can make extremely sharp prints.<br>

If you want more info email me off list.</p>

<p>And you cannot enlarge these negatives, they must be contact printed.</p>