Modiying an inkjet printer for carbon printing?

[elauq]

In carbon printing, the depth of the gelatin-pigment solution that sits on the final support determines the various tones. Could an inkjet printer be modified so as to lay down the correct depth of pigment solution for the final image? Does the depth or thickness of the coating correspond linearly to the tonal range in carbon prints?

How about filling all inkjet cartridges with one very light pigment solution (B&W for this discussion), something with a value of 254. The inkjet printer would print a light grey, 254, out of every nozzle. If the print was run through the printer a second time, would the tone be 253, a third time at 252, up until the 255th time where the image is now as black as possible at 0? Maybe there’s not quite a linear correlation of depth and tone, but just run the print through printer enough times (registration problems not withstanding) to build up the required depth using the one “ink” cartridge.

Better idea?

Elauq

[sanking]

IHHO, not easily. The pigmented gelatin solutin that we use to make carbon tissue is much thicker, at any given temperature, than the pigmented inks of inkjet printers. Unless you could super-heat the pigmented gelatin I see no way to force it through the nozzles of inkjet printers.


Sandy

In carbon printing, the depth of the gelatin-pigment solution that sits on the final support determines the various tones. Could an inkjet printer be modified so as to lay down the correct depth of pigment solution for the final image? Does the depth or thickness of the coating correspond linearly to the tonal range in carbon prints?

How about filling all inkjet cartridges with one very light pigment solution (B&W for this discussion), something with a value of 254. The inkjet printer would print a light grey, 254, out of every nozzle. If the print was run through the printer a second time, would the tone be 253, a third time at 252, up until the 255th time where the image is now as black as possible at 0? Maybe there’s not quite a linear correlation of depth and tone, but just run the print through printer enough times (registration problems not withstanding) to build up the required depth using the one “ink” cartridge.

Better idea?

Elauq

[htmlguru4242]

This is, as are many things of this type, technically possible, but quite impractical. There are a few problems that I can see with this. The first is the previously-mentioned problem of thickness. Printer inks, depending on the brand, are not particularly thin, but nor are they as thick as pigmented gelatine. It also must be considered that there are two types of inkjets. The first uses piezoelectric heads to allow droplets on ink to exit to the page. This relies on htesirface tension of the inks to be consistent to what the cartrige was designed for. These are the common inkjets, such as HPs and Epsons. The other types vaporize the inks in ordder to transfer them to the page. These are printers such as the Canon bubble jet. These would be nearly impossible to modify for this, as the inks would have to have a boiling point identical to that of the original inks.

[elauq]

Thanks for the responses.

Even if a whole new inkjet head was designed to apply the viscous pigment-gelatin solution used in carbon tissue, the thickness needed for shadow areas, if applied in one pass, would ooze and bleed outside the prescribed pixel. If multiple passes were used to build up depth, you'd have to worry about adhesion between layers and possible color changes due to the bond between layers. Typical ink from an inkjet adheres to the paper fiber and does not aquire much depth.

[htmlguru4242]

I'd have to agree with elauq, getting something from an inkjet to build up would be intersting. The other issure would be that on paper, the ink would be absorbed, and you'd end up with a soaked piece of paper. It may work on some type of plastic, but there would be adhesion problems there as well.

[avandesande]

I always thought it would be neat to create a LED head so you could put photo print paper in your inkjet. You would have to be pretty good with electronics/software to get it going though. You could probably sell such a unit for 1000$

[htmlguru4242]

Well, now, that's quite an awesome idea. It would be quite tricky, but it would be awesome as well ... You may be able to modify an existing inkjet heads, taking the current output from the head (which would normally go to the cartrides) and sending it to an amp and LED driver. If you wanted to get really, fancy, you could then run it through incorporated develop / stop / fix tanks, and have a finished print come out...

On another thought, you could use a laser printer, modified to avisible light laser, in order to print out a photo (though it would be halftoned)

[Helen B]

If we're considering alternatives, how about filling a cartridge with a diluted reducing agent?

[elauq]

Is there some sort of inkjet out there that premixes inks before applying them to the paper rather than dithering separate colors on the paper, as is the norm? Dye-sublimation sort of pre-mixes the inks.

[Jarred McCaffrey]

You and I are on the same wavelength, Helen. It seems to me that spraying developer of varying dilutions directly onto photo paper might just be crazy enough to work.