Digital Cibachrome service proposal

[Jake Purches]

Dear all - I would like your opinions please.
I have a bespoke lab in England, and already make large format RA4 prints on a Lightjet 5000 printer at 405 dpi. I have been offered a 30 inch Cibachrome processor. I used to do a lot of hand Ciba prints some time ago. My Lightjet already has the Cibachrome mode built in. The question is this: Would there be interest in a service that could provide up to 30 inches by 50 inch Cibachrome digital prints? The beauty of it being digital is that all of the traditional ciba printing techniques are ironed out by digital control and the process can then be icc profile compliant. Currently I only know of a lab in Germany and possibly one in New York. If I was to provide a service would there be any interest in it?

[James Hilton]

Dear all - I would like your opinions please.
I have a bespoke lab in England, and already make large format RA4 prints on a Lightjet 5000 printer at 405 dpi. I have been offered a 30 inch Cibachrome processor. I used to do a lot of hand Ciba prints some time ago. My Lightjet already has the Cibachrome mode built in. The question is this: Would there be interest in a service that could provide up to 30 inches by 50 inch Cibachrome digital prints? The beauty of it being digital is that all of the traditional ciba printing techniques are ironed out by digital control and the process can then be icc profile compliant. Currently I only know of a lab in Germany and possibly one in New York. If I was to provide a service would there be any interest in it?

Maybe an obvious question, but why is the processor being offered by the seller, is it due to somewhere closing down, or was it not being used enough to be economical?

I am sure there is some interest somewhere out there, but what I'm not sure about is if there is enough to justify keeping the machine full of Ilfochrome chemicals ready to go. I've noticed that a lot of places with Lightjets now tout Fuji Crystal Archive Super Glossy as the RA-4 alternative to Ilfochrome if you want the high gloss look, do you offer this too, if so do you agree or not?

I think you would need to very diligently calculate the square footage needed per month/week to cover costs and see if that volume is realistic? I suspect in this day and age an Ilfochrome service is a hard one to sell in the volumes needed because of price, which narrows the market down a lot. Also I think it is fair to say many pros who would have gone down the Ilfochrome route ten years ago without too many second thoughts would now by default go for inkjet or RA-4 with a Lightjet before considering Ilfochrome. Another question is has anyone recently phoned up your lab and asked for an Ilfochrome print or if you could print an image in a way that would look similar?

[bob carnie]

I ran digital and traditional cibachromes using our Lambda 76 , we stopped the service altogether 4 years ago and threw out a perfectly operating cibachrome 30 inch processor.

Keeping the chem's alive with low volumne proved difficult, the machine took up too much real estate for dollars being generated, getting product was a crap shoot,
clients were not willing to pay double the price print fee for a 30x40, there has not been any sustained marketing from the Manufacturer for over 20 years.

Your market may vary. I do still get asked to produce them, they were IMHO outstanding prints, I feel most of the blame should be put at the Manufactures doorstep
they clearly let the ball down with this product,and as a business decision I would scrap the process again.
The Ilford Swiss group were responsible for this poor effort, back in the day, the English and Swiss group worked very well together , I unfortunately got into the game very late and did not see the good days, I worked for company's that did in the 80's but by the time I purchased my machine I had missed the boat.
I think if I was in a huge market like NY or London things would have been better as Cibachrome process needs paper running through the machine.

I own a Lambda and to get the 21 step neutralized , you need fresh chem's or it will bounce around trying to calibrate, not sure if your Light jet is the same, though I would imagine it is.

The big question I would ask you is,, can you get the chem's and paper easily and can you get them fast???
If so you could build up work and run the processor in spurts , this is what we did for the last two years.
but in the end it was just not viable for us.

[jp]

I'd use such a service a couple times a year and would be in no big rush for the output.

It'd be a nice alternative to inkjet, which I like, but aren't in love with.

I'd probably be printing more from the my Nikon digital photos than from my LF stuff. I bet most digital users don't know they can print to cibachrome.

[bob carnie]

good scanner , good operator, I would have to say yes.

Will the final image be as sharp from a scanned 4x5 to 8x10 chrome as printing directly from the original chrome?

[Kirk Gittings]

Lets say to the eye it will appear as sharp or even sharper. Perceived sharpness to the viewer of a print and real sharpness like you see in a chrome on a light table are two different things.

[Drew Wiley]

I'd disagree with Bob about the sharpness issue, but not enough to affect the commercial viability of the end product. It really all depends how the image is prepped in between (optical printing makes masking mandatory). The biggest problem with Ciba is that the paper doesn't keep well - you have to have enough volume to turn it regularly or risk crossover and other balance shifts. And the corrosive nature of the bleach means some expensive maintainance issues, and here at least, disposal complications much more serious than with small-volume drum processors. Fuji Supergloss is less idiosyncratic and allows RA4 development... still, Ciba has a special look and really responds well to certain hues in the chromes. It's more "different"
than better or worse than the Fuji alternative, but distinctly more expensive.

[Drew Wiley]

Again, Kirk, I'd distinguish between a look which is "sharp" vs one that is "sharpened"
(which can be done in either PS or analog via unsharp masking). A nitpicky nuance, but
real and important to some of us, but not as significant a variable as the skill of the printer and quality of equip in either instance. Just a slightly different look. And a lot
depends on the original. With a 35mm or med format original it's a lot easier to milk the
information out using a scan, at least unless a very high quality interpositive or interneg is made (which is a service almost nonexistent nowadays). With large format
originals the optical printing path starts really coming into its own and has a significant appeal. But I'm obviously not running a commercial lab. I'm printing from my own very tightly exposed (or culled) originals, and can really appreciate the curve flexibility PS provides when folks have to work with what's given to them by others.