Cibachrome Classic Shortages and Substitutes

[tim atherton]

""Epson Ultrachrome"
Now is that a bull*^it name to describe a 'photograph' made from ink spray or what?"

Simple answer? No

Longer answer - as opposed to one made from what? Chromogenic dyes, azo dyes, carbon pigment, pigment, silver gelatin.. and so on - there are 101 different processes.

[Jeff Moore]

I agree with Chris on this one. As an ongoing, non-scientific experiment, about a year ago I had six of my 4x5 chromes drum-scanned and printed to 16x20 on Fuji Crystal Archive with a Lightjet, then printed the same digital files myself to 16x20 at home with my Epson 7600 on Premium Lustre paper with UltraChrome inks. All twelve of these prints are dry-mounted and matted in an identical manner. At every opportunity I show these prints side-by-side (without commentary) to friends, including serious photograhpers and "laymen" alike. Every time, every single time, they pick the Epson UltraChrome prints as their favorites. I have never, not once, had anyone I have shown these prints to choose the Lightjet as their preference.

[bob carnie]

Chris Jordan

Unless Wilhelm has changed "The Permanence and Care of Color Photographs" whereas he gave ciba chromes a good recommondation, as well as amazing dark shelf storage expectancy.
Also in Switzerland you can in fact go to the head office and see cibachromes on display from the early 60"s or late 50". I do think this qualifys as over 45 years in display. I would not think that could be said of a Epson Ultrachrome.

Yes I do own a ciba processor, but as well I have a RA4 processor, I do print from Lambda and I purchased a Epson 9600 using ultrachrome inks.
I think that one should choose the media they like and go from there , end of conversation, artist are making great sales using RA4 cyrstal archive or endura prints. Do you think they last??? Hang around for twenty years and see the results.

Here is my order of permance for colour with my limited scope---- Colour Carbon Prints on paper - Cibachrome - Some pigmented Ink Jet - RA4..

As a photographer and printer , I work in all of the above (except carbon Prints) took a workshop on Ultra Stable 7 years ago and did not find it viable for me to work with. The only way to tell , is time and we have seen fading RA4 colour, we have seen fading rc black and white, as yet I have not seen fading cibachrome and ink jet is in its infancy stages and time will tell.

Rambling a bit here , but I think the proof will be over time, let inkjets sit on walls for a period and we will all have a chance to experience their longevity , by watching their progress over 20-50 years.

[Keith Laban]

I have to say I agree with the contributors to this thread who have indicated a preference for Ultrachrome prints. I used to have Ciba prints made for me and at the time they were as good as you could get, but time has moved on.

The quality of a colour Ultrachrome on matte rag art papers is unique, completely different to the high gloss Cibachromes and unmatched by any other process. However I'd probably choose LightJet or Chromira rather than Ultrachrome if I were producing prints on glossy papers and I might even still be in the darkroom if I were working in B&W.

The over-riding advantage of Ultrachrome over Cibachrome is the total personal control over the print the process offers.

www.keithlaban.co.uk

[bob carnie]

Keith

What would that personal control advantage be.???????

Subject matter is a key, for choice of material one uses. I will admit that I prefer images of flowers or portraits of sunsets on the rag paper inkjet .
But harder images with metal or off colour scenes I would choose ciba.
cibas do need to be light to have a glow ,which you may not have to do with a rag print.

I disagree with its "time to move on",, I think on should match the process to the imagery you are producing

[Keith Laban]

What would that personal control advantage be.???????

Simple, the virtually unlimited degree of control offered by Photoshop and the ability to personally control each stage of the process through to the final print.

Of course having scanned my transparency and created my master file I would then have the option to have the file copied to film by a third party and printed by a third party to Cibachrome, but this would be one step too far and two people too many for my liking and the print would not be printed on my preferred paper.

www.keithlaban.co.uk

[tim atherton]

Somewhere, from my days as a photographic archives technician, I having the Ilfochrome/Cibachrome testing data from the IPI (who tested the materials, I don't think Wilhelm did? - he used their numbers)

The basic graphs are in the Ilford doc below, but it misses out an awful lot of data


http://www.ilford.com/html/us_english/pdf/302e.pdf

It still has very good dark storage numbers, but as a result of the IPI testign, Ilford (and Wilhelm I think) revised the dispay numbers, especially for unprotected pritns. If I remember correctly, Ilfochrome is especially susceptable to atmospheric agents acting on the materials - hence the poor ratings for unprotected materials.

Last I saw, for various display scenarios RA4 C-Type prints - Fuji Crystal Archive or Kodak Ultima generally have the edge. (I think that may also be the case for combined display and later dark storage as well, but I'm not 100% on my memory on that)

For dark storage if it's stored that way from the get go it's still something like 400 or 500 years for Ilfochrome I think (as opposed to 100 or 200 for various RA4 type materials). Though if you go into sub zero storage of colour materials, that changes upwards for both as well.

[Pete Caluori]

Greetings,

The original question was regarding the availability of Cibachrome, now Ilfochrome. My memory may be failing, but I am pretty confident that I read an E-press release that said Ilford would be phasing out Ilfochrome materials in 2005... Perhaps this is one the reasons supplies are becoming unvailable???

The entire discussion of inkjet, RA, dye transfer and color carbon is really a different topic. Each process produces a unique looking print that has its own set of qualities - archivability being only one of them. I personally like print made by all of these processes, but I don't think any one process is the be all and end all - I.E. no process is "perfect."

As for archival issues, I'd be very careful about what anyone (even Wilhelm, RIT and the IPI) says especially if there is no history. AFAIK, Ciba/Ilfochrome has a track record, so does RA, dye transfer and color carbon. The only one lacking a track record is inkjet, but time will tell. Don't misunderstand what I'm saying, inkjet has a place and I use it, but so does Ilfochrome: the two are not the same and will never produce similar results. When Ilfochrome goes away it will be a sad day.

Regards, Pete

[Pete Caluori]

I forgot to address substitutes...

The closest thing I've seen to Ilfochrome is Fuji Crystal Archive printed on Fujiflex substrate, not the conventional RC material. Kodak is making a RA paper called metallic and though I have yet to see a sample it too may be a viable substitute.

Regards, Pete

[David A. Goldfarb]

I've seen prints on the Kodak metallic paper, and it looks nothing like Ilfochrome, but it could be interesting for certain types of subjects (particularly if they involve metallic surfaces).