Dye Transfer & E Porter

[Greg Blank]

We have a 30x36 print in our frame shop, mat signed Eliot Porter, the redbuds, the print looks like a computer generated image though semi matte thin paper. Just wondering if someone out there was authorized by Eliot to make lambdas of his work. The print is dry mounted which we did not do.
What does the surface of the dye transfers look like? This looks like RC Paper.

[Drew Wiley]

I can't tell you any specifics, but EP images for relatively recent museum presentations have been digitally printed. And that's awfully big for dye transfers associated with him.
An actual dye transfer print would have richer color, be upon an F surface paper more
reminiscent of glossy fiberbase b&w baryta stock (capable of receiving the dye and mordant), and somewhere in the image probably show signs of misregistration - though that could be replicated if the digital files were scanned from a print per se rather than the
original transparency. The signature on the mat, however, sounds fishy. EP passed away
some time ago, and you'd have to do some research to see if any heir had the legit rights
to his work, let alone his signature. Jim Bones did much of his later DT printing and might
know.

[Drew Wiley]

Oh ... and you might post this question over on the Dye Transfer Forum ... there are members who go way back and even commercially printed for EP back in the day.

[jp]

I've seen EP images in the dye transfer medium. They do have a rich color; more natural rich color than cibachromes, vibrant and with proper contrast. I haven't seen any that big. You know right away when you walk up to or walk by the print from a couple feet away that it's not a normal color print or cibachrome or inkjet without even thinking about it. It's instinctive.

As drew said, it's got a glossy fiber base look, with the depth similar to a nice B&W FB print. I haven't handled them to know how thick they actually are. If you can find locally a serious EP collector-historian, that would be most useful.

[frotog]

http://www.matthewporterphoto.com/

His grandson might know about recent editions.

[marfa boomboom tx]

We have a 30x36 print in our frame shop, mat signed Eliot Porter, the redbuds, the print looks like a computer generated image though semi matte thin paper. Just wondering if someone out there was authorized by Eliot to make lambdas of his work. The print is dry mounted which we did not do.
What does the surface of the dye transfers look like? This looks like RC Paper.

http://www.cartermuseum.org/collections/porter/
For something about his work.... Easy to get in to see...

Marfa. Where
Democracy isn't and allegory

That size could have been a dye... 42 inch was the largest width, work would have been 38 width..
You shouldn't notice misreg -- it wouldnt have left the shop in those days.

[Keith Fleming]

My wife has long had (circa 1990) a Porter poster of his color photograph of a path through a bamboo grove. It's a very good copy: I had to use a reversed 50mm lens from a 35mm camera to see the dots from the printing press. The image is 25X30 inches, and below that is printed a Porter signature 2.5 inches high, then a black line above the words "Museum of Fine Arts Boston." Given that this was the latest technology in 1990 for making mass consumption prints, I would guess that some organization, such as a museum, has used more modern methods of making such a print for sale.

Keith

[Drew Wiley]

Marfa - trying to get a dye that big without a bit of misregistration somewhere would be
exceptional. Often its visible in the mask margins rather than actual transfer colors. Dyes also bleed somewhat, and that's another giveaway. And the margin of the print under the mat wouldn't be clean, though in this case, that might have been trimmed off to dry mount it. But I doubt it is a dye in the first place. This was a popular image with a lot of
reproductions. My sister even had a big framed on. It looked good, but an actual DT side
by side would be conspicuously different. EP himself printed small, and allegedly was not
as good at it as his hired assistants. The nature of the equipment itself was not state of
the art either. It would have taken a large commercial lab to do a DT this size, and I know
who did much of it, and don't recall them ever mentioning doing work for EP anywhere near
this large.

[marfa boomboom tx]

Marfa - But I doubt it is a dye in the first place. = and I know
who did much of it, and don't recall them ever mentioning doing work for EP anywhere near
this large.

I agree that it isn't likely a DT ...

FYI marfa to alpine

http://goo.gl/maps/FNzoG

howdy who{+} gonna shake them Bones/.

[Alan Curtis]

I'm quite lucky to have several DT prints, some my father made and several from print trades with Jim Bones (better deal for me than him). Jim showed me that if you look at a DT print with a loupe you will see a 3d appearance, the dyes are actually stacked on top of each other.
I also agree that the print in question is very large for a DT. I've never seen any color print that can match a DT for brilliance.