Transparency film problems

[chris_raney]

<p>I'm still struggling to create an acceptable black & white digital negative. My current problem is that when I print up a tack-sharp, fabulously detailed digital negative on Pictorico OHP out of my Epson 2200 printer, it only generates fuzzy, ethereal-looking images in the darkroom when I print on either graded or multi-grade FB paper (my standards). The effect is similar to what Hollywood's diffusion lenses in the 1940s did for aging actresses. Were I looking for that gauzy, glowing effect where the detail turns to mud, well, I've achieved it. But I simply hate this look. What I'm trying to achieve are cold, knife-sharp, brutally detailed prints. And no, it's not the printer, because it otherwise produces tack-sharp photos. </p>

<p>I picked Pictorico OHP because it was a name that kept cropping up on these forums, and appeared to be the best material for this process. Am I operating on incorrect information? What does the Pictorico 'white film' do? </p>

[bob_sunley]

<p>What size of negative are you printing AND, how much are you enlarging it in the darkroom.</p>

<p>Film negatives have detail in the 50-100 lp/m, way finer than your printer. If you want a tack sharp print on silver based paper, print your negative large enough so you do a contact print.</p>

<p>If you are doing a contact print, are you putting the ink side of the neg towards the photo paper?</p>

 

[chris_raney]

<p>I'm not enlarging at all, simply printing the negatives the same size as the prints will be: contact print size. But a bolt of lightning just shot through me with your other comment. I had not stopped to think that I should be putting the ink-side toward the paper. This may be a hallelujah moment, Bob! </p>

<p>I'll get back to printing in a couple of days and I'll let you know how your suggestion worked out. </p>

[bob_sunley]

<p>It will make a huge difference. :)</p>

 

[scott_ferris]

<p>Yes columated light and ink side down for your exposure.</p>