Workflow/methodology question.

Howdy all,

I’ve been printing platinum palladium for a number of years using a methodology that is different than yours. I’ve been going through the manual, and it is easy to follow along. My question is about your prescribed methodology. Can you tell me why (with piezo pro inks) it is better to create curves and apply them within the print tool app instead of applying the curves to the image within Photo shop? I suppose I could try both ways and answer my own question, but thought asking might save a bit of time.

Thank you in advance for your answer.

Best, dave

3 basic reasons.

  1. You have 129 points of calibration data (as apposed to only 16 in a photoshops curve).

  2. The individual points of data are 16bit as apposed to only 8bit calibration points for phototoshop.

  3. Because you are limiting the actual ink, you are not degrading the bit-depth of the actual image (aka by changing either top our bottom inputs). 100% 16bit pipeline is preserved.


The other reasons are ease of use and screen to print matching (aka, never changing the image, not even inverting) and the ability of PiezoDN to treat a darkroom print like an inkjet print.




Now that makes a lot of sense Walker. I knew there had to be a logical explanation.


Thanks so much for your response.



There is also no need to flip the image in Ps since that can be done in PT/QTR and saved as part of your preset.

Learned that as well :slight_smile: after a few times that I “forgot”.

Post it notes are going up.

Thanks for the response Keith. I do like the Piezo Pro ink set. For prints, this is a great ink set. Still processing workflow for digital negs. Initial results look very nice on Hahnemuhle, Arches, new (and old) Revere. Have not tested Bergger or Twin Rocker yet.