Cibachrome vs Digital Prints

[Julian_3496]

One of the things coming out of this thread is that we all have different preferences, thank God! A couple of points from Shane's excellent post - finding a process that excites you is a wondeful thing!

The concept of darkroom prints being 'handmade ' is a bit of a misnomer IMO. In the darkroom we control a mechanical/chemical process by turning a light on and off and sticking filters in the path of the light. The skill comes in controlling the process. In the digi darkroom we use a computer to do the control, but the process has to be intelligently and expertly managed in exactly the same way as a darkroom. Just like a viewcamera gives you so much control it also gives you umpteen billion ways of messing up an image, the same holds true for the digi darkroom. Even if this wasn't the case, the only thing that should matter is the look of the final print. You need a process which gives your work the look you want.

Both Ilford and Wilhelm have altered the longevity claims of the cib process and they are both claiming about 15years for a ilfochr print behind glass. That would worry me.

[Shane Knight]

It is great that we have this great site to compare opinions. I kindly disagree with Julian's last post regarding the skill level of printing in the dark room vs. digital darkroom. We can both agree that you need to use the process that makes you happy and keep you shooting. Which ever process is chosen, it will have it's challenges. Some people think that making adjustments on the computer is the same process as adjustments in the darkroom, I think they are wrong. There is a lot of work and skill that goes into a file before digital output, and the adjustments can be saved once the final is ready. There is no skill after the final process....just hit print when you need a print. With darkroom, you have to use your skill everytime you put a piece of paper on the easil. Everyprint gets the hardwork and skill...and mainly the love to goes into a final piece of art.

As a fine art photographer....the whole process (from shooting to printing) is everything.

That is only my opinion and whatever process is used....just do your best and put all your love in to it. A good friend of mine told me once...the best camera ever made is the camera you shoot most with while smiling.

NOW....for the longivity of Ilfochromes.....sorry Julian...I disagree once more. I mean no disrespect.

Ilforchromes will fade at an unacceptable level in 15 years. That is WITHOUT glass or protection.

30 years with glass. I believe they will last longer but that is my opinion. Ilforchrome's fading element is not damaging light rays, the fading is caused by high humidity. With a sealed frame with conservation glass, Ilforchromes will last a long time.

From Ilford's site. http://www.ilford.com/html/us_english/pdf/302e.pdf

Wilhelm use to say that Ilfochromes would last forever in the dark storage and 100 years displayed. What is the difference from now and then ...nothing. I believe Wilhelm is very PRO digital and set the Ilfochromes to fail on the new test. HOW....he pump huge amounts of humidity while testing. Knowing that humidity does not affect the longivity of Fuji Crystal Archive in the same way. FCA fading element is uv light. I have seen Fuji Crystal Archive prints fade. I have one, and my friend has one. That was enough for me.

All color photograhs will fade...let me repeat that....ALL COLOR PHOTOGRAPHS WILL FADE. 30 years or 60 years....they will fade. Please don't write back and tell me that laminating and sprays will make them last over 100. I and others in the laminating field think that the laminates wont last more than 15 - 20 years before they crack and peel.

Let me sum it up....I rather have a gracefully fading Ilfochrome on my wall than a perfect digital reproduction.

Happy shooting...and keep the bug alive.

Shane Knight

www.shaneknight.com

[Donal Taylor]

Hey Shane - do you have your life savings in shares in Velvia? - that stuff is rather hard on the eyes - that's pretty saturated.

Are the pritns as um... "bright"?

[tim atherton]

Shane - can you point me to the humidity issue in Willhelm's tests? I thought RIT had also reduced the longevity of Cibachrome significantly as well?

[Shane Knight]

Hello Tim,

Give me a little time and I will try to find some info regarding the humidity issue with Wilhelm testing.

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

On the top of page 3 of 3, you will find the light stability graphs and data for unprotected and protected Ilforchromes tested by Rochester Institute of Technology (RIT).

If you have more current info regarding permanence, please let me know, I do like to keep up with the current info... Thanks

[Julian_3496]

Thanks for the post Shane. What makes art great is how many ways people find to express themselves. I'm not a crystal archiva fan either, I dislike the lack of DmAx, but Ultrachromes on Ilford paper...!

Julian

[Paul_thomann@acm.org]

What blows me away is to make Ciba transparencies. To get controls shoot a grey card, take readings from the original trans with a Macbeth then adjust the exposure and color (but not the processing times) for the Ciba trans. Last of all test it with a step chart (at the same setting as the grey card) to find out how many stops you can reproduce. Then make sure you only use transparencies that meet that criterion.
Blow it up to 16x20 or 20x25 use a good lightbox (less than 1/2 stop difference over the whole surface) and you have a thing of beauty.

[Bill_1856]

The answer is, in fact, that some images will look better with inkjet and some better with Ilfochrome.
To make great Ilfocromes, you will often need to make contrast and higlight masks, just like we used to do for Dye Transfer. Printing inkjets is, relatively speaking, a piece of cake (once you spend the hundreds(?) of hours required to become proficient with the process).
Whatever advantages the Ilfochrome has at present over inkjets will soon (within 3-5 years) completely disappear, unless Ilford gets off their arsses and upgrades the llfochrome process, but that's pretty unlikely considering that they didn't even bother with B&W materials.
I'd recommend that you spend your time, money, and energy learning digital and Photoshop.

[naturephoto1]

Bill,

Ilfochrome (Cibachrome) is no longer owned by Ilford or Harman. It was sold to Oji Paper Company of Japan in July 2005.

Rich

[paulr]

There is no skill after the final process....just hit print when you need a print. With darkroom, you have to use your skill everytime you put a piece of paper on the easil. Everyprint gets the hardwork and skill...and mainly the love to goes into a final piece of art

It seems to me that making subsequent prints requires repetition of mechanical motions, but not much skill. It takes a skill to control the process and realize the vision of the first print. After that, you could very easily teach an attentive assistant how to do the exposure, burning and dodging, agitation, timing, etc.--in all but the most extreme cases (local intensisfication or reduction, etc.). In color it's usually even easier--the exposed paper goes right into a processor and comes out done.

There's only context in which it makes sense to say the wet darkroom requires more skill. In color work especially, the process affords much less control, so it can take extraordinary skills to get a print out of certain negatives that would only require routine skills from a digital printmaker.