Bettina Haneke is the only dye transfer transom printer. Get in line, soon./
http://bettinahaneke.com/en/
Bettina Haneke is the only dye transfer transom printer. Get in line, soon./
http://bettinahaneke.com/en/
Last edited by 826257; 10-Apr-2022 at 16:15.
I have a few Cibachrome prints on the wall (from 4x5) including a 20x24 of a trail in the woods taken about 40 years ago. Did anyone shoot Cibachrome directly in the camera. I think it's speed was about 6 ASA. It would have been laterally reversed. I had Cibachrome drums and a Uniroller but never tried it.
I still have a Cibachrome 4x5 drum, and use it all the time to develop 4x5" film. It's perfect for one sheet.
Life after E6?
Well of course, we've gone to heaven . . . with digital capture and digital printing.
At least, that's what I've done. Not so sure that I'm in heaven, though.
What's the problem with digitally printing E6 capture? I've been giving this some thought. At least, we don't have to deal with the orange mask in color negative.
I'm lucky to have as a good pal the only dye transfer printer I know of in the southern hemisphere: Andy Cross who lives in Brisbane, Australia. He writes on Dye Transfer techniques and teaches the process to aspiring students. He also consults with a number of American galleries re contemporary production of classic DT images. The really lucky part is that I have several of his pictures; gorgeous things.
Photography:first utterance. Sir John Herschel, 14 March 1839 at the Royal Society. "...Photography or the application of the Chemical rays of light to the purpose of pictorial representation,..".
There's relatively little activity on the group site lately, and virtually zero image sharing. It's a spinoff from Jim Brownings forum dye transfer forum and still contains his technical information and input. Andy sometimes chimes in. Some members no longer print DT but continue to have interest in it and share information. Some are merely scouting out the process in case they want to dive in. The problem is getting or making more matrix film. But nobody knows how many DT printers are still active in the world. It's obviously diminishing, but not extinct. During its heyday there were five different manufacturers of supplies.
The huge advantage over color carbon and carbro etc is that you can fine-tune prints in progress, and produce those in multiples using the same set of matrices. Different dye sets can be used for specific results. All kinds of options. But the advantage of color carbon is that every you need is readily available, and with care, you can achieve significantly more permanent results in terms of lightfastness. But you only get one print at a time, and its a tedious process. DT can be done using precision modified conventional enlargers; carbon etc is strictly a UV contact process, with a few proprietary exceptions like Fresson. But there are all kind of color "alt" processes out there. None are capable of the kind of precise detail associated with directly enlarged Ciba or RA4 prints directly from film.
Lately I mainly do B&W with film and color with digital. But I still have a 100 sheet stash of fresh Ektar 100 in 5 x 7 that I should really start using. I just had Custom Bellows make a nice new bellows for my Linhof Master L and I need to waste some film in it. Bellows was quite reasonably priced.
US Army, Color Corp of America (a major player), obviously Eastman Kodak, Technicolor Corp for sake of release stills, and in Europe, apparently Agfa at one time. I think there was yet another US source, but can't recall its name. Certain items were likely to be outsourced to one another; but in the main, no single corporation dominated the whole. Often dyes were sourced directly from dye manufacturers, and there were many potential combinations, depending on the specific application. Eastman was just one of several prime sources for dyes.
Bookmarks