-
Archival stability of dye-transfer prints
Hi guys, I'm interested in knowing about the archival stability of dye-transfer prints. People say that dye-transfer is one of the most archival processes, but I have also heard that it is quite a fugitive process, and that it has been confused with pigment transfer (which is in fact extremely archival).
Does anyone have some hard information about this subject (test results, info fromWilhelm, etc.)?
Thank you in advance for any thoughts,
~cj
-
Archival stability of dye-transfer prints
Hey Chris,
There may be some useful info on Ctein's web site about die transfer. He is the guru of die transfer. www.ctein.com
BR
-
Archival stability of dye-transfer prints
To oversimplify a bit, the test results Wilhelm reported in his big book showed Kodak Dye Transfer materials to have dark storage stability equivalent to that of pigment-based processes within the limits of his test, but far inferior to the pigment-based processes, and not even really superior to Cibachrome, for light-fading stability. You can download the book for free from his website now.
Of course, Kodak dye transfer materials are now gone, save perhaps for Ctein's freezer, and all bets are off with respect to any alternatives now on the market.
-
Archival stability of dye-transfer prints
Dye transfer, when done right, is quite impressive. I know where there's an Eliot Porter dye transfer print made about 40 years ago. It's been hanging in a guy's living room for many years (no direct sun but plenty of light). This print is, well, stunningly beautiful still. No sign of deterioration. No fading. No color shift. And it's not like it's in a temperature and humidity controlled environment.
I'll be very impressed if you can get a dye transfer done in the print sizes you seem to favor ;-)
I'm a little suspicious of this Ctein guy - he seems very proud of himself. But, there are others. I've seen some of Charles Cramer's dye transfers and I think he was a master of dye transfer on the level of Porter. Dye transfer was his printing method of choice for many years, until he had difficulty obtaining the materials. Cramer might well talk to you about it.
-
Archival stability of dye-transfer prints
Ctein cites Henry Wilhelm's (of Wilhelm Imaging Research fame) 700+ page book ca. 1993 The Permanence and Care of Color Photographs: Traditional and Digital Color Prints, Color Negatives, Slides, and Motion Pictures. It's available free on-line, apparently, at the above link. Looks worth perusing. Hopefully there's an index!
-
Archival stability of dye-transfer prints
Wilhelms book is THE standard text on (the permanence and care of) colour materials for museums, archives and conservators etc
-
Archival stability of dye-transfer prints
I'm a little suspicious of this Ctein guy - he seems very proud of himself.
Bruce, don't let that relatively minor bit of promotional puffery on Ctein's home page put you off. Some years back I had the opportunity to visit with Ctein and look at his dye portfolio. The prints he showed me did indeed reflect a very high level of technical command of a difficult medium, and on a personal level he was a gracious, friendly and unpretentious host. Whether his pictures are to your taste esthetically is of course up to you, but there's nothing that anyone needs to be "suspicious" of.
-
Archival stability of dye-transfer prints
I have a "Wash Off Relief" three-color dye tranfer print that is still in excellent conditon (no fading, color rendering stable) that was made in 1936.
-
Archival stability of dye-transfer prints
my uncle has some dye transfers that he did 40-50 years ago that are just as vivid and beautiful as the day he did them. they are hanging on the wall of his house ( central massachusetts) in very un-museum-like conditions.
-
Archival stability of dye-transfer prints
Martin Parr is now having some of his exhibition prints done by a guy in Cornwall - can't remember his name - who has a process for dye transfer from digital files...
-
Re: Archival stability of dye-transfer prints
I came across this old thread after doing researching on the web as to the legacy of the fabled dye transfer print in our digital age.
I thought I'd add my 2 cents to this old thread to at least memorialize a tidbit of more information about this subject. It is all being lost as the old timers die off.
In the 1970's I worked for a short time with Bob Pace at Graphic Process Co in Hollywood CA. Bob was one of the top dye transfer men in the country. When he worked as Pace Color Labs in N.Y. he rolled out transfers for the top photographers of that time including Irving Penn and Yousuf Karsh. Bob was very generous with his time helping me out.
The beauty of dye transfer was a fresh set of color prints could be rolled off at any time from archival processed matrix separations. But the inherent permanency of the dyes Kodak used seldom made this necessary. But if you wanted ultimate fade ability at that time, the prize went to ciba.
I remember Graphic Process having a display of giant cibachromes in the front window. Direct CA sunlight was blasting away at them all day. The cibachromes developed a craquelure to the base emulsion...but the colors never faded. They were really something when it came to fade resistance.
The bad thing about the ciba was the plastic look of the base material. Maybe they changed that, I have not kept up with it. They also left a lot to be desired in the area of print control that masking offered with the dye transfers. In the end, cibachromes could not compare to dye transfers when it came to making a beautiful, traditional print.
Here are some dye transfers from the late 1940's and early 1950's I just scanned today. They have been stored in normal conditions with contact to acid containing boards. No signs of fading I can see. Prints were either made by Dean Child or by a company he owned called U.S Color Print in Portland OR.
http://i685.photobucket.com/albums/v...g024jpeglr.jpg
http://i685.photobucket.com/albums/v...6-2-jpeglr.jpg
http://i685.photobucket.com/albums/v...-2-Cjpeglr.jpg
http://i685.photobucket.com/albums/v...031-jpeglr.jpg
-
Re: Archival stability of dye-transfer prints
Quote:
Originally Posted by
slackercruster
The bad thing about the ciba was the plastic look of the base material. Maybe they changed that,
No. They were proud of that all plastics base and considered it one of their sales points...
But at least up to the late eighties they still had a paper based material (not fibre based, more like PE) - cheaper and less well regarded, unsuitable for their small volume amateur process, and at least by the time I became aware of it, only available in a high contrast version suitable for direct colour photocopies.
-
Re: Archival stability of dye-transfer prints
Dye transfer dyes are dependent upon an acidic mordant, so you would not want them in
contact with an alkaline buffered board. Permanence is a very complex subject with these
prints because there were many different possible combinations of dyes as well as all kinds
of storage variables over the years. Generally they didn't do too well in sunlight or other
UV sources. Ciba is a completely different subject - superb dark stability, good display
permanence under ordinary tungsten or indirect sunlight, but rather poor UV tolerance in direct sunlight or under hot commercial halogens. I have stockpiles of both media, though my Ciba supplies will run out first. What I need now is to retire so I have some time to
print!
run out.
-
Re: Archival stability of dye-transfer prints
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Drew Wiley
Dye transfer dyes are dependent upon an acidic mordant, so you would not want them in
contact with an alkaline buffered board. Permanence is a very complex subject with these
prints because there were many different possible combinations of dyes as well as all kinds
of storage variables over the years. Generally they didn't do too well in sunlight or other
UV sources. Ciba is a completely different subject - superb dark stability, good display
permanence under ordinary tungsten or indirect sunlight, but rather poor UV tolerance in direct sunlight or under hot commercial halogens. I have stockpiles of both media, though my Ciba supplies will run out first. What I need now is to retire so I have some time to
print!
run out.
The transfer scans I sent in do show yellowing somwhat on the backs of the prints. But that is about it. They were hole punched and interlaced in a notebook with carboard between them. I removed them from the binder and the boards.
Maybe someday I'll get around to making a inkjet print from the dye transfer scans and comapre it in a fade test in sunlight. I have a few transfers that are not that great with the subject matter, might use those. Will probably tape them up inside my window. They would both run if water hits them.
-
Re: Archival stability of dye-transfer prints
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Drew Wiley
Dye transfer dyes are dependent upon an acidic mordant, so you would not want them in
contact with an alkaline buffered board. Permanence is a very complex subject with these
prints because there were many different possible combinations of dyes as well as all kinds
of storage variables over the years. Generally they didn't do too well in sunlight or other
UV sources. Ciba is a completely different subject - superb dark stability, good display
permanence under ordinary tungsten or indirect sunlight, but rather poor UV tolerance in direct sunlight or under hot commercial halogens. I have stockpiles of both media, though my Ciba supplies will run out first. What I need now is to retire so I have some time to
print!
run out.
The transfer scans I sent in do show yellowing somwhat on the backs of the prints. But that is about it. They were hole punched and interlaced in a notebook with carboard between them. Looks like they were stored that way since 1955 or longer. I removed the prints from the binder and the boards.
Maybe someday I'll get around to making a inkjet print from the dye transfer scans and comapre it in a fade test in sunlight. I have a few transfers that are not that great with the subject matter, might use those. They would both run if water hits them, so will do it inside the house taped inside my window.
-
Re: Archival stability of dye-transfer prints
No dye transfer or early dye-destruction prints (proto-Cibachrome) would even exist if
the one-shoe-fits-all Wilhelm accelerated-aging formula were consistently factual. But
beautiful prints over 75 years old exist in both categories. With inkjet it's too soon to tell.
There's simply no substitute for time. I can make a Cibachrome fade out in a week if I wanted to, or show you Ciba prints which have been on display for thirty years and look brand new. There are just so many variables. And now you've got dramatically improved
C-prints like Crystal Archive which allegedly have good display permanence but will eventually yellow from residual couplers before the fading kicks in. And even color carbon
or carbon prints can fail. Not all pigments are really permanent by any means, and sometimes the sandwich of various layers is prone to blistering. Only the marketing monkeys and sleezy tourist gallery owners make blanket statement about permanence.
-
Re: Archival stability of dye-transfer prints
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Drew Wiley
No dye transfer or early dye-destruction prints (proto-Cibachrome) would even exist if
the one-shoe-fits-all Wilhelm accelerated-aging formula were consistently factual. But
beautiful prints over 75 years old exist in both categories. With inkjet it's too soon to tell.
There's simply no substitute for time. I can make a Cibachrome fade out in a week if I wanted to, or show you Ciba prints which have been on display for thirty years and look brand new. There are just so many variables. And now you've got dramatically improved
C-prints like Crystal Archive which allegedly have good display permanence but will eventually yellow from residual couplers before the fading kicks in. And even color carbon
or carbon prints can fail. Not all pigments are really permanent by any means, and sometimes the sandwich of various layers is prone to blistering. Only the marketing monkeys and sleezy tourist gallery owners make blanket statement about permanence.
Back in the 70's I tested Type C vs Agfacolor prints for fading. While the Agfa produced beautiful prints, it faded much quicker than Type C.
I will get hold of a 5 ink jet printer hopefully late June and do some fading tests with the transfers I have that I don't like. Do you think aluminum foil would be a good sun blocker on half of the prints to show before and after fading? I may buy a type C print as well or whatever the printer uses that is not inkjet. Don't know how much longer we have to get chemical developed prints.
-
Re: Archival stability of dye-transfer prints
Type C prints and RA4 processing are not in any danger of disappearing. The market is still
huge. Cibachrome mfg has recently shut down. Dye Transfer would ironically be one of the
easiest processes to revive because all you'd need to remanufacture is the matrix film (its
been done several times already - but you need money!). Dyes are readily available. Window light tests only tell you about permanence in window light; but yes, you could use
alum foil. The problem with inkjet prints in general is that there are so many possible combinations of paper and ink. You could probably solicit samples from forum members.
And inkjets probably will hold up better for awhile in UV exposure. But the whole flaw in
accelerated aging tests is that not all lumens are equal. Cooking some dyes in the window
is not the same thing as long-term exposure to lower levels of light.
-
Re: Archival stability of dye-transfer prints
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Drew Wiley
Type C prints and RA4 processing are not in any danger of disappearing. The market is still
huge. Cibachrome mfg has recently shut down. Dye Transfer would ironically be one of the
easiest processes to revive because all you'd need to remanufacture is the matrix film (its
been done several times already - but you need money!). Dyes are readily available. Window light tests only tell you about permanence in window light; but yes, you could use
alum foil. The problem with inkjet prints in general is that there are so many possible combinations of paper and ink. You could probably solicit samples from forum members.
And inkjets probably will hold up better for awhile in UV exposure. But the whole flaw in
accelerated aging tests is that not all lumens are equal. Cooking some dyes in the window
is not the same thing as long-term exposure to lower levels of light.
Yes, but this type of testing gives one a good idea. I wont be doing tons of tests, just a few.
I disagree with Type C. There used to be many labs doing Type C...all gone. At least in my local. Sure you can get some crappy machine wet processed prints, but nothing high grade custom. Look how dye transfer was lost. Some day it will be like that for many other things we count on as permanent availability.
Sunlight is an excellent aging method. If it wont fade in sunlight over the long term, it most likely wont fade in the dark over an extended period of time. If it fades quickly in sunlight, good chances it will do so in the dark as well. That formula held up with my limited testing with Agfacolor from 30 years ago. But I can say I wont put my money in something that fades in two weeks of sunlight thinking it will hold up over the long term.
Now, who can say how things will turn out hundreds of years down the line. But we have to give it a shot at testing.
-
Re: Archival stability of dye-transfer prints
There are four major manufacturers of type C paper right now. Some of it like Crystal
Archive is probably a lot more light stable than either dye transfer or Ciba. You need to
realize that nearly all digital printing other than inkjet is being done on RA4 papers. It is
a lot more cost effective than inket once the scan is made, particular for serial quantities.
Lightjet, Lambda, and Chromira printers all use this kind of paper. Huge rolls of it are still being made. And the very same papers can generally be used in traditional enlargers. It is also made on polyester base to resemble Cibachrome. It's hardly dying at all in terms of either availability or quality. In fact, C-printing is just really coming of age now that both the quality and
permanence issues have been largely resolved. But nothing looks like a dye transfer print
except another dye transfer print!
-
Re: Archival stability of dye-transfer prints
Have you done any tests with them? Ciba are very tough to beat for fading.
Do you have custom labs in your area that will produce custom C prints?
-
Re: Archival stability of dye-transfer prints
I have my own facility for printing up to 30X40 C-prints, but am trying to decide whether to add a 50" processor. I have been making high-end Cibas since the product first came out, so am extremely familiar with it. Dye transfer is intended more as a retirement hobby,
since it's so time intensive. There is one major local lab still doing custom C-prints the
traditional enlarger manner, but several others using the expensive digital printers. I prefer
the more seamless look of straight optical printing, but the advantage of the big digital
printers is that they can take files from color negs, transparencies, or direct digital capture. Crystal Archive is has much better light resistance than Ciba, or better display life, but will eventually discolor (tend to yellow), so is inferior in terms of dark storage life.
-
Re: Archival stability of dye-transfer prints
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Drew Wiley
Type C prints and RA4 processing are not in any danger of disappearing. The market is still
huge. Cibachrome mfg has recently shut down. Dye Transfer would ironically be one of the
easiest processes to revive because all you'd need to remanufacture is the matrix film (its
been done several times already - but you need money!). Dyes are readily available. Window light tests only tell you about permanence in window light; but yes, you could use
alum foil. The problem with inkjet prints in general is that there are so many possible combinations of paper and ink. You could probably solicit samples from forum members.
And inkjets probably will hold up better for awhile in UV exposure. But the whole flaw in
accelerated aging tests is that not all lumens are equal. Cooking some dyes in the window
is not the same thing as long-term exposure to lower levels of light.
This is the issue. Yes it can be done, but it wont be done because of economics. The only way it could be revived is by $$ underwriting it and forgetting the profit motive. For instance, I have had many pairs of custom skis built. They are not economical to have built at all, but I don't care about the $$, so I do as I please. If i was just about the $$, I would never have them built.
That would be the only way dye transfer may be revived, but on a much larger scale than custom skis...forget about the $$ and just do it by someone that loves the process and has tons of $$.
BUT even if so, who would make the prints even if the materials were revived??
All the knowledge is going...going...gone soon. I was go great dye man myself. I could slap something together, but it was poor compared to the master printers. It will be 20 years soon since its demise and lots of talk about bringing it back...but nothing. I'm not holding my breath anyway. If we look at the trends, all wet film and print processes are headed downhill and eventually out. I may be wrong, but that is what I see as the trend.
-
Re: Archival stability of dye-transfer prints
Quote:
Originally Posted by
slackercruster
Have you done any tests with them?...
Here's the best documented testing you're likely to find:
-
Re: Archival stability of dye-transfer prints
Sal, everyone appreciates Wilhelm's pioneering tests and his attempt to get things on an
objective playing field, but at the moment, the Aardenburg system addresses some of the
shortfalls in Wilhelm's methodology, particularly regarding the variability of inkjet ingredients.
-
Re: Archival stability of dye-transfer prints
Dye transfer has already been sucessfully revived, at least until the latest round of supplies dries up. But commercially it is indeed extinct - too expensive and laborious.
A few individuals will still make custom dye transfer prints. Three large batches of matrice
film have been run in Europe since Kodak dropped the process, and gallery prints are still
being made. I have a freezer full of sheets from one of those Euro runs. More film could easily be produced if the demand is sufficient. A bigger problem is the rapidly escalating cost of sheet film itself needed forcolor separations, masks, etc., although separations can also be made on image-setters, or matrice exposures can be made directly with blue laser devices. Go over to the Dye Transfer Forum to visit what is currently being done, along with a lot of contentious discussion about methodology; for DT is a process particularly amenable to hybrid technique.
-
Re: Archival stability of dye-transfer prints
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Drew Wiley
I have my own facility for printing up to 30X40 C-prints, but am trying to decide whether to add a 50" processor. I have been making high-end Cibas since the product first came out, so am extremely familiar with it. Dye transfer is intended more as a retirement hobby,
since it's so time intensive. There is one major local lab still doing custom C-prints the
traditional enlarger manner, but several others using the expensive digital printers. I prefer
the more seamless look of straight optical printing, but the advantage of the big digital
printers is that they can take files from color negs, transparencies, or direct digital capture. Crystal Archive is has much better light resistance than Ciba, or better display life, but will eventually discolor (tend to yellow), so is inferior in terms of dark storage life.
With my own work I gave up the wet darkroom ages ago. Just digitial now. But I'm just a hobbiest. Are you heading to inkjet at all or sticking with the wet end for your biz?
-
Re: Archival stability of dye-transfer prints
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Drew Wiley
Dye transfer has already been sucessfully revived, at least until the latest round of supplies dries up. But commercially it is indeed extinct - too expensive and laborious.
A few individuals will still make custom dye transfer prints. Three large batches of matrice
film have been run in Europe since Kodak dropped the process, and gallery prints are still
being made. I have a freezer full of sheets from one of those Euro runs. More film could easily be produced if the demand is sufficient. A bigger problem is the rapidly escalating cost of sheet film itself needed forcolor separations, masks, etc., although separations can also be made on image-setters, or matrice exposures can be made directly with blue laser devices. Go over to the Dye Transfer Forum to visit what is currently being done, along with a lot of contentious discussion about methodology; for DT is a process particularly amenable to hybrid technique.
Well that is good to know. What about the dyes and tanning dev and the rest. Are these readily available or are they home / lab made?
-
Re: Archival stability of dye-transfer prints
I looked for the DT forum here, can't find it. Where is it?
-
Re: Archival stability of dye-transfer prints
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Drew Wiley
Sal, everyone appreciates Wilhelm's pioneering tests and his attempt to get things on an
objective playing field, but at the moment, the Aardenburg system addresses some of the
shortfalls in Wilhelm's methodology, particularly regarding the variability of inkjet ingredients.
I posted the link since it seemed the question was mainly dye transfer versus silver-dye-bleach versus chromogenic. No applicability to inkjet express or implied. :)
-
Re: Archival stability of dye-transfer prints
Just Google it. The Dye Tranfer Forum is run by Jim Browning, who has a lot to do with the
successful revival of the key materials. He also holds patents on the Chromira. Kodak dyes
weren't unique - they were just high purity versions of common dyes. Tanning developer
is easily made, but I personally prefer a technique more similar to old wash-off relief. What
I have done is modernize separation negative technique, but all darkroom. I get enough of
damn computers here in the office!
-
Re: Archival stability of dye-transfer prints
If you guys want me to do a fade test, will any of you send me a sample of a cibachrome, a high grade type C, Fujicolor Crystal Archive and some high grade inkjet print sample prints to add to the dye transfer fade test?
I will expose them in my window to the sun for 6 months and see what happens. I'm willing to use one of my 8 x 10 dye transfers and a commercial inkjet print from a 5 color Canon. And I can get a cheap C print. That is all I can contribute.
Note: all my dye transfers I'm willing to test are from the late 40's to early 50's. I do have a few transfers I made in the 70's. But they are not for testing. So if any of you want to add a modern transfer to the test to compare dye stabilty to an older transfer, send me one.
I will post the results with scans of the test images when I'm done back to this thread. Half of each image will be exposed to the sun and half covered with alum foil. 8 x 10 would be a good print size, down to a 5 x 7 as a minimum, unless you got something rare to test. They don't have to be great prints, just good enough to test the dyes.
PM me if you got something to contribute to the test.
-
Re: Archival stability of dye-transfer prints
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Sevo
No. They were proud of that all plastics base and considered it one of their sales points...
But at least up to the late eighties they still had a paper based material (not fibre based, more like PE) - cheaper and less well regarded, unsuitable for their small volume amateur process, and at least by the time I became aware of it, only available in a high contrast version suitable for direct colour photocopies.
Well they can be proud of it all they want. The proof shows a cibachrome looks like hell after it gets handled some. It reminds me of a new shiny black car . Looks great the first day out of the showroom...and it is all downhill from there.
The black car, as well as the super shiny ciba, shows all defects, scratches, fingerprints, dust. Color wise the ciba is very good. And fade resistance it is excellent. But the shiny surface ruined it. If it was type F semi-gloss surface they would have had a winner.
http://i685.photobucket.com/albums/v...aphy/ciba3.jpg
http://i685.photobucket.com/albums/v...aphy/ciba4.jpg
-
Re: Archival stability of dye-transfer prints
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Drew Wiley
I have my own facility for printing up to 30X40 C-prints, but am trying to decide whether to add a 50" processor. I have been making high-end Cibas since the product first came out, so am extremely familiar with it. Dye transfer is intended more as a retirement hobby,
since it's so time intensive. There is one major local lab still doing custom C-prints the
traditional enlarger manner, but several others using the expensive digital printers. I prefer
the more seamless look of straight optical printing, but the advantage of the big digital
printers is that they can take files from color negs, transparencies, or direct digital capture. Crystal Archive is has much better light resistance than Ciba, or better display life, but will eventually discolor (tend to yellow), so is inferior in terms of dark storage life.
Think about going injet. Inkjet is our future. When all cylinders are firing an inkjet is the dye transfer of the digital age. From prelim tests it is outstanding with fade resistance. And the colors are xlnt. Even the cheap 5 color injet printers produce xlnt work.
http://i685.photobucket.com/albums/v...g045jpeglr.jpg
...4 x 5 print made from a cheap $75 inkjet printer form Walmart
-
Re: Archival stability of dye-transfer prints
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Oren Grad
I'm a little suspicious of this Ctein guy - he seems very proud of himself.
Bruce, don't let that relatively minor bit of promotional puffery on Ctein's home page put you off. Some years back I had the opportunity to visit with Ctein and look at his dye portfolio. The prints he showed me did indeed reflect a very high level of technical command of a difficult medium, and on a personal level he was a gracious, friendly and unpretentious host. Whether his pictures are to your taste esthetically is of course up to you, but there's nothing that anyone needs to be "suspicious" of.
Bob Pace used to say a dye man's ability could be judged with skin tones. When looking at a printers work, see how the skin tones look. Are they peachy and natural or are they off. TBS, nowadays most dye printers print landscapes or close up of plants. They seem to avoid skin tones like the plague. Maybe just by chance or maybe by desire?
http://i685.photobucket.com/albums/v...-2-Cjpeglr.jpg
...dye transfer print circa 1948 - 1954 U.S Print Co. Portland, OR
-
Re: Archival stability of dye-transfer prints
Quote:
Originally Posted by
slackercruster
Well they can be proud of it all they want. The proof shows a cibachrome looks like hell after it gets handled some. It reminds me of a new shiny black car . Looks great the first day out of the showroom...and it is all downhill from there.
The black car, as well as the super shiny ciba, shows all defects, scratches, fingerprints, dust. Color wise the ciba is very good. And fade resistance it is excellent. But the shiny surface ruined it. If it was type F semi-gloss surface they would have had a winner.
I had a big batch of cibachromes done for an exhibit back in the 1990's. Someone else printed them, and I framed them.
This warning brings back much to the front of my mind regarding handling them. They were easy to dimple, scratch, fingerprint. My solution was to minimize handling and contact till they were behind glass. If you can be careful and minimize handling, they will stay looking nice and will seem worthwhile. But like a new black car, you want to handle them so bad.
-
Re: Archival stability of dye-transfer prints
Quote:
Originally Posted by
jp498
I had a big batch of cibachromes done for an exhibit back in the 1990's. Someone else printed them, and I framed them.
This warning brings back much to the front of my mind regarding handling them. They were easy to dimple, scratch, fingerprint. My solution was to minimize handling and contact till they were behind glass. If you can be careful and minimize handling, they will stay looking nice and will seem worthwhile. But like a new black car, you want to handle them so bad.
How do they work behind glass? Do they exhibit problems other glossy prints do when in contact with glass mounts? Or must their be an air space bewteen the glass and print?
-
Re: Archival stability of dye-transfer prints
I work part time in an archive and I can tell you that a lot of archivist do not trust the findings of the WIR. They only proof they accept is prints actually surviving a certain time accelerated test are nice but they leave out a lot variables and there findings are often far from reality. Especially Inkjet prints are far from archival even the so called archival ones do exhibit fading.
BTW recently found out that Orwo/Filmotec produces paper for the Dye transfer process and it's exclusively sold by http://www.dyetransfer.de/ they also produce Dye transfers from your images
Dominik
-
Re: Archival stability of dye-transfer prints
Quote:
Originally Posted by
slackercruster
How do they work behind glass? Do they exhibit problems other glossy prints do when in contact with glass mounts? Or must their be an air space bewteen the glass and print?
I wouldn't think of having them touch the glass. There is a space caused by the matting.
-
Re: Archival stability of dye-transfer prints
I've got hundreds of Cibas, at least small ones (nearly all the big ones are sold). Not one
of them is scratched. Kink marks were a bigger risk, esp handling large sheets in the dark.
I made a special sled to transfer big sheets onto the vacuum easel. No different than handling polyester base in any other media, including Fuji Supergloss. You learn to never
touch the image itself and how to correctly frame it. But one time I did get a defective
batch of Ciba which has a remarkable 3D lustre to it, not like their pearl RC paper, but not
high gloss either. They said it was a bad batch of gelatin. Never seen anything like it again.
A beautiful surface.
-
Re: Archival stability of dye-transfer prints
Dominik - I don't think anyone here in North America has worked with that last batch of
matrice film. Egbert Haneke uses up most of it for his own work, which is exposed with
blue laser rather than enlarger. But it's allegedly similar to the batch made by Efke, which
I am several others are using. Back in its heyday there were several major manufacturers
of dye transfer film and dyes, including not only Kodak, but the US military, Color Corp
of America, Hollywood of course (for release prints), and one or two others. Then alternative dyes might be selected for some special need. So it's pretty hard to generalize
the archival properties of the medium in its broader sense. My own brother's dye transfer
prints faded out because he kept them in vinyl sleeves. But that's how portfolios were done back then. They didn't know better.
-
Re: Archival stability of dye-transfer prints
Drew - do you think the methodology of dye transfer can be transfered to carbon tissue and gum printing in tri colour??
Making continuous tone separation negatives is easy peasy on my lambda , but I am being warned about highlight staining with these types of negative and
am being recommended to hard dot film.
But I am curious of your thoughts about combining the dye transfer work flow with a contact tissue process.
Bob
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Drew Wiley
Dominik - I don't think anyone here in North America has worked with that last batch of
matrice film. Egbert Haneke uses up most of it for his own work, which is exposed with
blue laser rather than enlarger. But it's allegedly similar to the batch made by Efke, which
I am several others are using. Back in its heyday there were several major manufacturers
of dye transfer film and dyes, including not only Kodak, but the US military, Color Corp
of America, Hollywood of course (for release prints), and one or two others. Then alternative dyes might be selected for some special need. So it's pretty hard to generalize
the archival properties of the medium in its broader sense. My own brother's dye transfer
prints faded out because he kept them in vinyl sleeves. But that's how portfolios were done back then. They didn't know better.
-
Re: Archival stability of dye-transfer prints
Bob - there's all kinds of chatter going on in both APUG and the Dye Tranfer Forum about
hybrid this and that. There are all kinds of hypothetical tweaks, but as usual, the devil is
in the details. I never did personally like any of the hard-dot modernizations of carbon -
something about a printed versus true continuous-tone photographic look. Charlie Cramer
can worked out image-setter figure for dye transfer, but even though dyes bleed a little,
some halftone still showed. The holy grail would really be a new set of highly transparent
process pigments (not inkjet inks, which use quite a bit of dye). I have a clue where to
turn, but have no time to personally experiement with yet another process. But if I ever
do get into something resembling true pigment printing, I'll be thinking outside the box
completely. Separation negs is the easy part of the problem - there are all kind of ways to
do them.
-
Re: Archival stability of dye-transfer prints
Sorry Bob, but I get a lot of interruptions here at the office, which take priority of course. ... Dye Transfer is really obsolete when it comes to sharpness, convenience, cost, or permanence. For garden-variety work, inkjet will do a better job 70% of the time. But
it's that other 30% of images, esp if shot specifically for the medium, where the transparency of DT dyes make all the difference. They have a life to them which inkjet
simply doesn't, and which traditional process pigments don't either. The basic problem is
that just about every alternative color worker has his own priorities, and it's difficut to get
economic traction where pooled investment is crucial to ordering a custom product run.
Either that, or you need to be independently wealthy - which I certainly am not!
-
Re: Archival stability of dye-transfer prints
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Drew Wiley
I've got hundreds of Cibas, at least small ones (nearly all the big ones are sold). Not one
of them is scratched. Kink marks were a bigger risk, esp handling large sheets in the dark.
I made a special sled to transfer big sheets onto the vacuum easel. No different than handling polyester base in any other media, including Fuji Supergloss. You learn to never
touch the image itself and how to correctly frame it. But one time I did get a defective
batch of Ciba which has a remarkable 3D lustre to it, not like their pearl RC paper, but not
high gloss either. They said it was a bad batch of gelatin. Never seen anything like it again.
A beautiful surface.
Yes, but you handle them with care. All people are not like you....
-
Re: Archival stability of dye-transfer prints
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Drew Wiley
Sorry Bob, but I get a lot of interruptions here at the office, which take priority of course. ... Dye Transfer is really obsolete when it comes to sharpness, convenience, cost, or permanence. For garden-variety work, inkjet will do a better job 70% of the time. But
it's that other 30% of images, esp if shot specifically for the medium, where the transparency of DT dyes make all the difference. They have a life to them which inkjet
simply doesn't, and which traditional process pigments don't either. The basic problem is
that just about every alternative color worker has his own priorities, and it's difficut to get
economic traction where pooled investment is crucial to ordering a custom product run.
Either that, or you need to be independently wealthy - which I certainly am not!
You should be getting high prices for your work. I looked at one printer in L.A getting near a thousand $ a print for super large prints. I think they were inkjet too! But they got the Getty museum with big pockets. But...I see your in SF, so your rent must eat up all the print profit.
-
Re: Archival stability of dye-transfer prints
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Drew Wiley
Sorry Bob, but I get a lot of interruptions here at the office, which take priority of course. ... Dye Transfer is really obsolete when it comes to sharpness, convenience, cost, or permanence. For garden-variety work, inkjet will do a better job 70% of the time. But
it's that other 30% of images, esp if shot specifically for the medium, where the transparency of DT dyes make all the difference. They have a life to them which inkjet
simply doesn't, and which traditional process pigments don't either. The basic problem is
that just about every alternative color worker has his own priorities, and it's difficut to get
economic traction where pooled investment is crucial to ordering a custom product run.
Either that, or you need to be independently wealthy - which I certainly am not!
Good summation.
-
Re: Archival stability of dye-transfer prints
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Drew Wiley
Just Google it. The Dye Tranfer Forum is run by Jim Browning, who has a lot to do with the
successful revival of the key materials. He also holds patents on the Chromira. Kodak dyes
weren't unique - they were just high purity versions of common dyes. Tanning developer
is easily made, but I personally prefer a technique more similar to old wash-off relief. What
I have done is modernize separation negative technique, but all darkroom. I get enough of
damn computers here in the office!
Could not find it. But does not really matter. Was just curious as to how many are doing transfers. I'm 100% out of the wet darkroom. Don't have much wall space for prints. So i just view on the 'puter mostly. But if I did print, it would be inkjet.
I had come into some vintage dye transfers and thought it would be a good time to do a little write up about it, so I did at some of the forums.
Now am curious as to fade tests. So will work in that area a little.
...they were something in their day though...dye transfers...crafted by hand and not by machine!
http://i685.photobucket.com/albums/v.../img030a-2.jpg
-
Re: Archival stability of dye-transfer prints
It's very difficult to know how many people are still dye transfer printing worldwide. It's
probably less than a hundred, and I'm only aware of four who will print commercially for
others. There were two basic versions: matrice film for use with separations taken from
chromes, and pan matrix film for printing directly from color negs instead. The last of the
pan matrix film (which was relatively uncommon) was stockpiled by Ctein, who has just
officially ended commercial printing with it due to diminishing supplies. But there are a
handful of individuals attempting to make their own analogous film. The whole field can get
pretty complicated (or fun - depending). It's a lot more tactile experience than inkjet printing, and when the hues land, they really land.
-
Re: Archival stability of dye-transfer prints
Quote:
...they were something in their day though...dye transfers...crafted by hand and not by machine!
If you really are interested in "hand made" and avoiding "Machines", you might want to also avoid using commercially made cameras and lenses, commercially made film and papers etc. ie all the machines and machine made products that make it possible for you to make your "Handmade prints".:)