Absurd Darkroom Challange

It is claimed one can make an IJ print that can't be
told from a SG print.

Challenge:

Make a silver-gelatine print than can't be told from
an ink-jet print.

--
Nicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio
Darkroom Automation: F-Stop Timers, Enlarging Meters
http://www.darkroomautomation.com/index.htm
n o lindan at ix dot netcom dot com

Nicholas O. Lindan wrote:
It is claimed one can make an IJ print that can't be
told from a SG print.

Challenge:

Make a silver-gelatine print than can't be told from
an ink-jet print.

Not that it makes one lick of sense, but...

A first stab - produce a negative on an ink-jet printer
and contact-print it. Certainly would want to flip
the image when printing the negative and then contact-print
ink-side to silver gelatin paper.

For bonus points, use a matte-surface paper - are they
even available any longer?

Dana

Hi,

What's the point? Comparing apples and oranges again??????

Nicholas O. Lindan wrote:
It is claimed one can make an IJ print that can't be
told from a SG print.

Challenge:

Make a silver-gelatine print than can't be told from
an ink-jet print.

What are the conditions for comparison? Can I use an 8x loupe to
examine the prints or do I have to stand back a certain distance; what
size prints, 8x10, 16x20 ?????? Can I use a 5x7 negative and enlarge
that?

Cheers,
Bogdan




--
__________________________________________________ ______________
Bogdan Karasek
Montr‚al, Qu‚bec bogdan at bogdanphoto.com
Canada www.bogdanphoto.com

"I photograph my reality"
__________________________________________________ ______________

"Bogdan Karasek" wrote

What's the point?
There has to be a point?

I thought this got settled long ago:

"A tale told by an idiot,
Full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing."
- W. Shakespeare

Nicholas Lindan wrote:
Challenge:
Make a silver-gelatine print than can't be told from
an ink-jet print.

What are the conditions for comparison? Can I use an 8x loupe to examine
the prints or do I have to stand back a certain distance;

The SG print has to look just like it was made on an IJ printer.
_Not_ look like an IJ print trying to look like an SG print.
A silver gelatine print that makes you say "That was made on an
ink-jet, stake money on it." A SG print that, for instance,
breaks into little colored dots if you look close.

Why would any one want to? Damn if I know. I'm still trying to
figure out why people want to make B&W IJ prints that look like
SG - it's just as pointless and ultimately impossible. High-tech
pictoralism: Making an IJ print that tries to look like a SG print
that tries to look like a painting http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pictorialism
-- very post-post-modern though.

Making a silk purse from a sow's ear can be done:
http://libraries.mit.edu/archives/ex...rse/index.html

Making a sow's ear from a silk purse is a far greater trick.

In the end, though, who would want either the purse or
the ear?

--
Nicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio
Darkroom Automation: F-Stop Timers, Enlarging Meters
http://www.darkroomautomation.com/index.htm
n o lindan at ix dot netcom dot com

Nicholas O. Lindan wrote:

Why would any one want to? Damn if I know. I'm still trying to
figure out why people want to make B&W IJ prints that look like
SG - it's just as pointless and ultimately impossible.

Well, if you stop obsessing on the leaves at the base of the
trees and take a step back so you can see the forest, it's
easy to understand.

Over the decades, people have developed an appreciation for
B&W photography. Some of those people most appreciate the
process by which B&W prints are produced, and some of those
people most appreciate the B&W prints themselves, regardless
of the process used to produce them.

If all you consider is the process, then, sure, IJ != SG
and never will, they're two different processes.

If all you consider are the prints, it's completely reasonable
to expect that good prints can be produced using different
processes.

How much an inkjet print can look like a SG print is really
a matter of how close one looks; we're already at a point
where one has to peer closely to tell the difference today.
At some point, perhaps one will need a microscope.

So, people want to make IJ prints that look like the good
prints they've viewed over the decades, prints necessarily
made on SG paper. That's the point and should be quite
easy to grasp. As technology and tastes evolve, the desire
to reproduce the look of SG paper may fade, but it's a natural
place for enthusiasts of B&W prints to start.

Cheers,
Dana K6JQ

On Wed, 11 Jul 2007 03:49:57 GMT, "Nicholas
O. Lindan" wrote:

Why would any one want to? Damn if I know. I'm still trying to
figure out why people want to make B&W IJ prints that look like
SG - it's just as pointless and ultimately impossible. High-tech
pictoralism: Making an IJ print that tries to look like a SG print
that tries to look like a painting http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pictorialism
-- very post-post-modern though.



July 11, 2007, from Lloyd Erlick,

Maybe make it by hand, with three tiny
brushes and three primary colors (or whatever
they're called).

I used to know someone who could do this.

It's just a sophisticated scanner and printer
combination. The hardware is expensive and
the software takes a lifetime to install.

regards,
--le
________________________________
Lloyd Erlick Portraits, Toronto.
website: www.heylloyd.com
telephone: 416-686-0326
email:
________________________________
--

Nicholas O. Lindan wrote:
It is claimed one can make an IJ print that can't be
told from a SG print.

Challenge:

Make a silver-gelatine print than can't be told from
an ink-jet print.

You could probably do it, dots and all by using a Light Jet Laser
printer with color photo paper.
gr

gr spake thus:

Nicholas O. Lindan wrote:

It is claimed one can make an IJ print that can't be
told from a SG print.

Challenge:

Make a silver-gelatine print than can't be told from
an ink-jet print.

You could probably do it, dots and all by using a Light Jet Laser
printer with color photo paper.

We may have a winner here.


--
Any system of knowledge that is capable of listing films in order
of use of the word "****" is incapable of writing a good summary
and analysis of the Philippine-American War. And vice-versa.
This is an inviolable rule.

- Matthew White, referring to Wikipedia on his WikiWatch site
(http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/wikiwoo.htm)