Epson 1430 Postivies for copperplate photogravure

1

Hi Walker,

Thanks for your follow-up. I am excited to integrate the Piezography inks into my alt workflow, especially the photogravure side of the equation. As you are aware true photogravure (resist on copper) is a fairly “organic” process in respect to all the many variables including environmental conditions. Those variables include:

  1. Carbon tissue sensitization
  2. Creation of positive
  3. Exposure of positive to carbon tissue/resist
  4. Proper resist lay down on the plate
  5. Resist drying and humidification
  6. Plate Etch
  7. Inking along with type of ink
  8. Paper choice

In short quite a few variables to nail down into a consistently objective workflow and more aptly described as controlled subjectivity/chaos. Unfortunately I do not have a “standard” workflow currently as my work in the process, while relatively successful over that last bunch of years, is in “fits and starts” often followed by long periods of inactivity. The process is dependent on a serious time commitment.

My current situation is one that I am not going to be using Cape Fear Press’s Phoenix Carbon Tissue (that I used previously) and will not be starting all over with their Dragon Carbon Tissue and the Piezography Inks for the positive creation. I am actually starting all over with a whole new workflow that will hopefully yield more consistent results. My first step in the journey is to find out what the best exposure for the Dragon Tissue will be. As I pursue this I would like to work on the Positives using the Piezography inks. Yes I am a masochist, but I know in the end the unlimited creative reward will be remarkable.

As I move along on this is there a particular curve that is a better starting point than another? I am new to all the Piezography forums and support and really do not know what is what and where to access the needed resources. I guess there is a big differentiation between Piezography and PiezeDN and I get that. Photogravure crosses the lines. Once I am able to get the good exposure and density for the Dragon Tissue I will be able to provide densities.

I thank you for your willingness to support and help creating a limited “pre-linearized” pos curve. I am sure this will be a useful piece of data for working with other customers with similar issues. It may be a while before I have the information for you. This is for my personal work and fulltime jobs and lie issues get in the way. I am fortunate however, as I personally own a reflection/transmission Eseco TRC-60 P equipped with AA filers, and X-Rite i1Pro Photo and a UV sensitive X-Rite 361T.

So there are two questions I have at the moment:

  1. Given my back-story is there a preferred Piezography curve I should use since I am really starting from scratch. Where are these curves located, it gets a bit confusing when working between DN and Piezography resources.

  2. On step 6 of your recent email, I suspect you are looking for the transmission density of the last step on the positive and not the related reelection reading from the print?

I am very glad I chose to move into the Piezography/PiezoDN ink system and appreciative of you willingness to support.

Marty

2

Here’s one I worked up on short notice. It’s a smoothed curve from an original photo rag profile but limited to 70% the amount of ink.

It should produce too much density (above den 1.4) in the darkest portions. It can then be limited when you tell me what # patch of the 256 is the max density required.

14xx-gravure-pos.quad (6.6 KB)

3

Hi,

Optimally a DR of 1.3 is required for copperplate photogravure with contemporary materials. I am using Cape Fear Press Dragon. Potassium Dichromate sensitization is competed with a 4% solution for a normal contrast range. I etched two plates with the limiter test target as there are many variable in the process and I am loading the deck with both testing the PiezoDN inks along with the Dragon tissue. The observed last black step was 47, -0 on the limiter target for both etches. The etch, surprisingly, was pretty linear with the black separation ending around 85%. Looking forward to your input and revised profile.

4

Here’s the limited curve for Cape Fear Press Dragon tissue (limited to 47).

14xx-CFP-Dragon-Limited-Gravure.quad (6.4 KB)

best,
Walker

5

Thanks Walker. Will post results after this etch. Marty

6

Hi Walker,

Just output a positive with the 14xx-CFP-Dragon-Limited-Gravure.quad. The positive looked a bit thin, the DR measured .76. I measured the densities from the original quad you provided with link limited to 70% and 31,-6 gave me a DR of 1.3. Photogravure is a bit of a wild beast and I wonder if the new curve is too lean at .76 and we should try with a density that would match the 31,-6 on the original curve. My fault for not reading the original densities on the positive.

Thanks,

marty

7

That would be patch 26 counting from 0 (out of 255) correct?

best,
Walker

8

Yes, that is correct. I was referencing the coordinates rather than the number of patches.

Thanks,

Marty

9

Sorry for the delay, had a cold.

Limited to 26 in the shadows.

14xx-CFP-Dragon-Gravure-v2.quad (6.5 KB)

best,
Walker

10

Thanks Walker, hope you feel better. I suffered from a crazy cold this past weekend also. I will keep you posted. Your assistance is very appreciated!!

Marty

11

Hi Walker,

Stump the chumps time. For some reason QTR has decided to print only part of my positive. Worked fine the other day and now no matter what I try it will not print the positive completely. Print fails at about 20% of completion. Tried different resolutions, tried printing the target from the other day that was too thin. Rebooted PC, purged printer memory, etc. No luck. Any ideas?

I have had this problem before and eventually it worked itself out. Not this time. FYI, I am using the printer wirelessly (always have). I wasted 3 sheets of Pictorico along with the inks to test 6 additional sheets of plain paper.

Hope I am just doing something dumb.

m

12

connect via usb (delete and re-install printer). It’s the wifi

-W

13

I should have guessed that. My printer is not near my PC. Fortunately I have a USB repeater cable and it was able to allow me a direct connection. Something looks wonky with the output and the head test. Could be the cartridges are low on ink. Hopefully a refill will solve the current issue.

14

Hi Walker,

14xx-CFP-Dragon-Gravure-V2.quad is only giving us a DR of 0.9 as opposed to 14xx-CFP-Dragon-Gravure wich gave us a DR of 0.72. Some improvement but short of a Dragon Gravure recomendation of a DR of 1.3. I went back and read the density of 14xx-gravure-pos which we knew would be over 1.4 but was actually 2.96. I think before the next round of tests we really need a DR of at least 1.10 to 1.20 to be worthy of the effort.

FYI, I am reading UV density with a X-Rite 361T. The last positive was printed with refilled and chip reset cartridges. A head test was conducted showing clean heads before printing the positive. Subjective observation of the positive is nice smooth toneaity albeit obviously thin.

What do you think?

Marty

15

Probably worth a phone call. I’ve been assuming that you are printing this ON PLATE THEN ON PAPER and finding the last point before it starts to have open bite.

ALL I’m doing is asking you what you wanted it limited to and doing that. So if you say limit it up 26 patches I’m limiting it up 26 patches. I’m not in any way involved with your workflow. If you want it to be 1.3 den print the original .quad and tell me exactly what patch (from the most dense part) it needs to be limited too . . .

-Walker

16

Hi Walker,

Great talking with you today. I think we have been on multiple wrong tracks. I am thinking the inks that were sold to me we not the correct inks for DN? I did work this through with Wells. Only you can confirm this. I have been indeed using the Ultra HD Matte Black. Reviewing the ink assignment chart for the 1430 I should be using the HD Photo Black. Guess what, that was not in my package of inks, I do have Warm Neutral Shade 1 which I assume is useless to me. I must have assumed the HD Matte was supposed to be used. Sheesh, lots of wasted time and materials me thinks.

Please verify and advise how to proceed. I suspect I need to purchase HD Photo Black. You have my contact information if you want to chat.

thanks again for your assistance and direction,

marty

17

This is PK and is the correct ink.

best.
Walker

18

OK here is where we are at Walker. Glad we were able to clarify that Neutral Shade 1 is PK. Somewhere along the lines I was looking at the wrong document, the instructions were quite clear. Shame on me.

New cartridge installed and all inks were confirmed that they were in the correct cartridges. Ran a clean cycle, check heads, all was OK. Ran two positives on Pictorico with the same target. Densities were read from the second positive to insure there was no residual Matte HD ink in the system. The curve that was uses was 14xx-gravure-positive. These are the UV density readings by steps from your the PiezoDN Limiter target. All numbers are over film base.

0 - 4.41
1 - 3.78
2 - 3.00
3 - 2.35
4 - 2.33
5 - 2.01
6 - 2.00
7 - 1.89
8 - 1.76
9 - 1.75
10 - 1.65
11 - 1.65
12 - 1.61
13 - 1.57
14 - 1.57
15 - 1.49
16 - 1.44
17 - 1.39
18 - 1.35 Target Range Limit
19 - 1.29 Target Range Limit
20 - 1.25
21 - 1.22
22 - 1.18
23 - 1.15
24 - 1.12
25 - 1.08

My target also includes a 0-100% scale in 5% increments. Those reading are:

100% - 4.8
95% - 1.6
90% - 1.23
85% - 1.00
80% - 0.84

So it look like we want to limit for between 18/19 on the PIEZO target and hopefully that would fall between 90-95% on my scale. Interesting to see how the density builds up fast over 95%.

Hope this gets us back on track.

Thanks,

Marty

19

Limited to 18.6

14xx-CFP-Dragon-Gravure-v3.quad (6.5 KB)

best,
Walker

20

Piezo Limiter Target step density = 1.10
My wedge 100% = 1.10

Still low, but getting closer. Do I have an issue on my side or is this experienced trail and error?

Thanks for you help Walker.

m