Luminous Landscape Forum

Equipment & Techniques => The Wet Darkroom => Topic started by: Mike W on November 30, 2007, 12:57:14 pm

Title: Cibachrome from digital file
Post by: Mike W on November 30, 2007, 12:57:14 pm
Hi folks,

Is it possible to get a cibachrome (or ilfochrome) from a digital file?
Is this technically dificult or impossible? Any labs that offer this service?

thanks
Title: Cibachrome from digital file
Post by: tsjanik on November 30, 2007, 03:16:14 pm
Quote
Hi folks,

Is it possible to get a cibachrome (or ilfochrome) from a digital file?
Is this technically dificult or impossible? Any labs that offer this service?

thanks
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=157295\")
Here's one; Cibachrome on a lightjet.  I haven't tried it; it is expensive.

[a href=\"http://www.jwphotolabs.com/pricelist.html]http://www.jwphotolabs.com/pricelist.html[/url]
Title: Cibachrome from digital file
Post by: Wolfman on December 01, 2007, 12:06:52 am
Try: http://www.weldoncolorlab.com/ (http://www.weldoncolorlab.com/) he is excellent.
Title: Cibachrome from digital file
Post by: Mike W on December 01, 2007, 02:36:23 am
So I guess it's possible?

It's strange since noone seems to advertise this interesting possibility, including the sites mentioned...
Title: Cibachrome from digital file
Post by: D White on December 01, 2007, 11:55:52 am
Cibachromes fade.
Title: Cibachrome from digital file
Post by: Mike W on December 01, 2007, 03:26:42 pm
Would you care  to elaborate?

I don't care if the prints fade, since I'll sell 'm. After that It's not my problem.
I do wonder why and how fast they fade (for my own benefit)

enlighten me :-)
Title: Cibachrome from digital file
Post by: wolfnowl on December 01, 2007, 05:17:03 pm
not going to touch that one...
Title: Cibachrome from digital file
Post by: Bill Caulfeild-Browne on December 01, 2007, 07:36:54 pm
I made Cibachromes for many, many years before I went digital in 2001. While most of these were sold at exhibitions, I also kept several dozen, and they have no discernible fading. Some of them are over 30 years old.

Now, they were matted with archival mats and protected under UV resistant glass, not hung in sunshine. They still "glow" with that deep Ciba colour.

Bill
Title: Cibachrome from digital file
Post by: KenS on December 02, 2007, 08:19:07 am
Quote
I made Cibachromes for many, many years before I went digital in 2001. While most of these were sold at exhibitions, I also kept several dozen, and they have no discernible fading. Some of them are over 30 years old.

Now, they were matted with archival mats and protected under UV resistant glass, not hung in sunshine. They still "glow" with that deep Ciba colour.

Bill
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=157571\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


I totally agree.  Most of my Ciba's aren't even under glass (but not in direct sunlight).  I have never noticed any fading.  I now print digitally and what I miss most is the great mirror like finish and glow of a Cibachrome.
Title: Cibachrome from digital file
Post by: gr82bart on December 02, 2007, 07:57:53 pm
I use to make a lot of Cibachromes too when I was in university. I still have many of them and I haven't noticed any fading. In fact recently I made a 'digital' Cibachrome from a scanned transparency and compared to the same image on a wet darkroom printed Cibachrome I made in my first year of university, it did not fade one bit. I wish I could scan the image in, but it's 16x20 size.

Anyway to respond to the original poster, Bob Carnie from Elevator Digital in Toronto is considered Canada's finest master printer. He prints for several top commercial and art photographers from around the world. He does Ilfochromes on his Lambda printer from digital files.

http://elevatordigital.ca/labhome.html (http://elevatordigital.ca/labhome.html)

Regards, Art.
Title: Cibachrome from digital file
Post by: Mike W on December 03, 2007, 03:59:43 am
Aha, so Lambda printers can handle Ilfochrome?
I'll see if there are Lambda equiped printers around and see if they can print Ilfo...

Thanks for the info, the Toronto-adress I can't use since I'm on the wrong continent :-)


thanks

Mike
Title: Cibachrome from digital file
Post by: tsjanik on December 03, 2007, 09:02:25 pm
Quote
I totally agree.  Most of my Ciba's aren't even under glass (but not in direct sunlight).  I have never noticed any fading.  I now print digitally and what I miss most is the great mirror like finish and glow of a Cibachrome.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=157641\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I agree, I have a 35-year-old Cibacrome that gets direct sunlight every  afternoon and exhibits no fading.  The unique aspect of the process is that the paper contains stable dyes that were destroyed, not formed, during processing. Nevertheless, I use an Epson nowadays.
Title: Cibachrome from digital file
Post by: D White on December 03, 2007, 11:05:52 pm
I ran an extensive wet darkroom for over 20 years before going into digital in 2001, (first with scanning and printing on an original Epson 7500). During my darkroom days I printed a lot of Ciba, with masking.

My large prints were under glass in my professional office under halogen track lighting, and in about four years you could take the matte off and see extensive fading. I reprinted many of these later with Epson 7600/7800 and was vastly more pleased with the results. These Epson prints continue to be under the halogen lighting with no hint of fading. My C-prints had also faded significantly under this same lighting.

The Wilhelm aging tests do indicate about 22 years for Ciba compared to 60-200 years for the ink jets. Further, there was an accelerated aging phenomenon with Ciba's under strong lighting which increased the rate by about four times.

Thus in real world display, Cibas do fade and I will be long dead before my ink jets fade.

My point is why bother with an expensive process to print on an inferior product that has significant flaws in it's color response. Digital printing on Fuji Crystal Archive would look better and last longer and likely be less costly and easier to get. I am surprised that Ciba is even still available.
Title: Cibachrome from digital file
Post by: dkeyes on December 07, 2007, 04:22:31 am
I did an extensive search on the net for printers and only found 3-4 in the US. I've used Hance in Arizona for mounting my Fuji Supergloss prints (like Cibas), they also print digital Cibachromes (Ilfochromes) and with Fuji Crystal Archive. I think the Fuji gloss is also just like the Ciba/Ilfochromes.
I'm not sure which paper is more stable, my guess is the Fuji Crystal.

Heres the list of printers that do either or both papers.
http://www.hancepartners.com (http://www.hancepartners.com)
http://www.jwphotolabs.com (http://www.jwphotolabs.com)
http://www.weldoncolorlab.com/ (http://www.weldoncolorlab.com/)
http://www.chromatics.com (http://www.chromatics.com)

- Doug
Title: Cibachrome from digital file
Post by: gr82bart on April 30, 2008, 08:00:58 pm
There's more than those listed in NYC alone.

Regards, Art.
Title: Cibachrome from digital file
Post by: Hieu on October 18, 2009, 04:36:08 pm
There is a lab in Adelaide, Australia, that can get a digital file, to cibachrome paper. The results are stunning, and the prices are quite competitive (considering the process involves manual hand printing).

I see alot of people spending thousands of dollars on a top end digital camera, (heck the new Leica M9 is about $10 000 AUS!), and only to print their photos on amateur bubble jet printers or at automated photo labs. It makes sense to use these guys (or something similar if you can find it elsewhere), especially considering you can just email them the files, and they can print them by order.

Check them out at: http://www.chromacolour.com.au/ (http://www.chromacolour.com.au/)
Title: Cibachrome from digital file
Post by: DanielStone on December 14, 2009, 01:15:20 am
I've never had a cibachrome made from any of my personal film, but I've seen them ,and when properly done (masking is usually needed), they're STUNNING!!!!

I used to work for a prominent camera store here in LA, and I sold some 4x5 FP4+ to the guy from Lab Ciba. I asked him if he could show an example some time of an ilfochrome, since I'd never seen one in person up until that point, he actually had a test print he was running to a client after buying the film(for making masks). He went out to his car, retrieved the print (was a pano of bamboo, big chutes, and was about 2.5'x5'. I believe he said it was from a 4x10 Velvia transparency. All I can say though, is, even with the crappy store lighting that I saw it in, it had a glow that I've never seen again since that moment. Every little nick in the wood was in super sharp detail, and I looked at this print from like 9" away. I examined this thing close, believe me .

Even if the rating is 29 years( I wouldn't display it). I'd rather have that print mounted to aluminum, and in an archival solander box or flat file.

different strokes for different folks, but I've seen some 8x10 transparencies(not mine) when picking up my E-6 from the lab, and they're glorious!!!!!

I have an IPF5100, and according to the ratings tests, my printer with good paper should last 100-200 years in proper dark storage.

I'm not a "show it off" person, I prefer to store in a dark, cool place where I can enjoy it, without worrying about damage from excessive exposure to dust, bad air, etc....

-Dan
Title: Cibachrome from digital file
Post by: tim wolcott on December 15, 2009, 09:31:00 pm
Quote from: Mike W
Hi folks,

Is it possible to get a cibachrome (or ilfochrome) from a digital file?
Is this technically dificult or impossible? Any labs that offer this service?

thanks
Now why would anyone want to have a toxic based, heavy metal and very fadeable print made this way.  I made the first pigment photograph with inkjet and was one of the founders of Evercolor.  I can't believe anyone would be considering making a photograph this way when we have a the inkjet pigment printing process.  There is no way in hell that a cibachrome could and would look better than a pigment photograph.  

Lets just poison our water system a little more for no reason at all.  Christ wake up and smell the coffee Misses Bueller.  

If you properly understand the way a photograph should be displayed than you would not ask such a question!!!!!!!!!!!!  Tim
Title: Cibachrome from digital file
Post by: Peter McLennan on December 15, 2009, 10:54:20 pm
Quote from: Photoguydon
Cibachromes fade.

Do they EVER.  

I have several large prints.  Those that lived (framed, behind glass) in bright locations for a few years are toast.
Title: Cibachrome from digital file
Post by: DanielStone on December 17, 2009, 01:27:53 am
funny how people are like "film is damaging to the environment, lets kill it" and "long live computers!"

watch ed burtynsky's film "manufactured landscapes" and it will hopefully change your mind on that fact. besides, you can pretty much neutralize the ilfochrome chem's when you poor them down the drain. I don't believe that labs do that though, they might have to have it carted off site by a chemical-disposal company.

manufacturing microchips is a VERY DIRTY process, with lots of heavy metals as a side-effect. just like shooting guns at a firing range, too much lead in the ground kills the animals. that's why we can't use lead bullets anymore, just copper jacketed HP's .

not trying to argue, but I do wish that people would realize that the best way to test the archivability of somethings is to just wait. we now know that platinum prints made in the 1890s are just fine when stored properly.

also, if people were to properly light their framed prints, they would know that putting ANY print on a wall that gets raw window sunlight will fade very quickly. obviously some processes faster than others, but nothings perfect...

just my .02c

-Dan
Title: Cibachrome from digital file
Post by: Jonathan Wienke on December 17, 2009, 07:49:39 am
Quote from: DanielStone
manufacturing microchips is a VERY DIRTY process, with lots of heavy metals as a side-effect.

The obvious difference is that this pollution is only generated once, when the computer is manufactured, while with Cibachromes the pollution is generated every time a print is made. Given that a computer can process and generate tens of thousands of prints in its lifetime, the environmental impact of the computer's manufacture is insignificant compared to the environmental impact of the printing process.
Title: Cibachrome from digital file
Post by: tim wolcott on December 17, 2009, 09:45:36 pm
Quote from: DanielStone
funny how people are like "film is damaging to the environment, lets kill it" and "long live computers!"

watch ed burtynsky's film "manufactured landscapes" and it will hopefully change your mind on that fact. besides, you can pretty much neutralize the ilfochrome chem's when you poor them down the drain. I don't believe that labs do that though, they might have to have it carted off site by a chemical-disposal company.

manufacturing microchips is a VERY DIRTY process, with lots of heavy metals as a side-effect. just like shooting guns at a firing range, too much lead in the ground kills the animals. that's why we can't use lead bullets anymore, just copper jacketed HP's .

not trying to argue, but I do wish that people would realize that the best way to test the archivability of somethings is to just wait. we now know that platinum prints made in the 1890s are just fine when stored properly.

also, if people were to properly light their framed prints, they would know that putting ANY print on a wall that gets raw window sunlight will fade very quickly. obviously some processes faster than others, but nothings perfect...

just my .02c

-Dan


Surely not everything can be green.  But for gods sake why produce something that by the very nature of its production has zero use.  It takes chemicals to produce it, to then make the print, by the very nature of it fades quickly and is degenerative dyes so which means that it fades very quickly in the light and the dark.  Oh by the way every print made this way hurts the color photographic print market in general.   So wake up Misses Bueller, it also looks fake where as Pigment print really have no negatives.

By the way platinum photos and silver gelatins fade because chemicals in the water that no one new about preventing the prints from fixing properly....

So lets wake up, if Black and white photographs all faded at the rate of cibachrome we wouldn't see any of them today and THEY WOULD'NT HAVE ANY VALUE.  AND BY THE WAY PIGMENT PHOTOGRAPHS ARE NOT GICLEE'S.  I didn't spend all these years to marketing pigment photographs to the world to have it destroyed by some johnny come lately.  Everyone needs to get on the same page, or we will suffer in the long run.  Tim

Title: Cibachrome from digital file
Post by: harlemshooter on May 28, 2010, 01:37:55 pm
are you kidding?

i'm a vc working in clean tech. the negative environmental effects from chip manufacturing and disposal have been a huge priority for us since 2001 (check the link below). combine the global figures for people using/replacing digital technology (and it's short shelf life) and bingo. water contamination from chip disposal sites is a MAJOR problem.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=A...407dc16fea94b0b (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6V7X-43CB8FX-7&_user=10&_coverDate=07%2F31%2F2001&_rdoc=1&_fmt=high&_orig=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_searchStrId=1351746132&_rerunOrigin=google&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=4d2697af0b866e64e407dc16fea94b0b)

darkroom color chemistry sure has its flaws, but please read up before making statements like the one below. no offense, but your claim is simply not true.

watch "manufactured landscapes"...those facts are real.  the truth ain't pretty, friend.



Quote from: Jonathan Wienke
The obvious difference is that this pollution is only generated once, when the computer is manufactured, while with Cibachromes the pollution is generated every time a print is made. Given that a computer can process and generate tens of thousands of prints in its lifetime, the environmental impact of the computer's manufacture is insignificant compared to the environmental impact of the printing process.
Title: Cibachrome from digital file
Post by: tim wolcott on May 28, 2010, 08:45:44 pm
I think he has thought wisely.  I think you maybe one of those who has invested a large some of money in Cibachromes that are poorly printed and flushed chemicals and heavy metals down the drain in  both residential areas and commercial areas.

At least making chips can be controlled and cleaned while making prints and just dumping the chemicals and heavy metals into the local water system with no controls.

So please don't tell me this crap.  Getting rid of film processing and chemically based prints that have virtually no life expectancy at all, is better?  Or let's go back to polaroids.  

I helped invent the first green pigment printing process and helped invent pigment inkjet.  

P.S.  I do not receive any money for any of the inventions, just the satisfaction of moving photography down the right path.

There is no excuse to make a cibachrome,  they are fake looking with poor dynamic range, color replication and can never ever look as good as a pigment print.  So yes you should get your facts right.

Tell me one way that cibachrome is better in anyway than pigment print.  Just one.  Because you can't.  Tim Wolcott

Title: Cibachrome from digital file
Post by: DarkPenguin on May 31, 2010, 11:25:17 pm
Quote from: tim wolcott
Tell me one way that cibachrome is better in anyway than pigment print.  Just one.  Because you can't.  Tim Wolcott
It is better at poisoning the planet.  If, you know, that's your goal and all.
Title: Cibachrome from digital file
Post by: tim wolcott on June 01, 2010, 12:50:01 pm
That's a good one Dark Penguin.  T
Title: Cibachrome from digital file
Post by: alangubbay on June 06, 2010, 05:13:46 am
Quote from: tim wolcott
I think he has thought wisely.  I think you maybe one of those who has invested a large some of money in Cibachromes that are poorly printed and flushed chemicals and heavy metals down the drain in  both residential areas and commercial areas.

At least making chips can be controlled and cleaned while making prints and just dumping the chemicals and heavy metals into the local water system with no controls.

So please don't tell me this crap.  Getting rid of film processing and chemically based prints that have virtually no life expectancy at all, is better?  Or let's go back to polaroids.  

I helped invent the first green pigment printing process and helped invent pigment inkjet.  

P.S.  I do not receive any money for any of the inventions, just the satisfaction of moving photography down the right path.

There is no excuse to make a cibachrome,  they are fake looking with poor dynamic range, color replication and can never ever look as good as a pigment print.  So yes you should get your facts right.

Tell me one way that cibachrome is better in anyway than pigment print.  Just one.  Because you can't.  Tim Wolcott
Title: Cibachrome from digital file
Post by: harlemshooter on June 15, 2010, 02:37:05 pm
Quote from: tim wolcott
So please don't tell me this crap...So yes you should get your facts right...Because you can't."  Tim Wolcott

tim,

as an "inventor" who does "not receive any money for any of the inventions" i take your comments with a grain or two of salt.

i am not really surprised that most are (1) very ill-informed as to the global impact of digital technology and (2) have no desire whatsoever to consider the ramifications of anything they do or say. that said, such superciliousness is truly gaudy and vainglorious.

i've certainly been struggling with this tension (my use of technology, whether analog or digital, and desire to act responsibly towards our environment of limited resources) for some time. recall plato's sentiment: "the unexamined life is not worth living."

i'm not going to post a text that most will not even bother to read but for those interested in an informative, accessible article on the footprint of digital technology:
http://www.lowtechmagazine.com/2009/06/emb...technology.html (http://www.lowtechmagazine.com/2009/06/embodied-energy-of-digital-technology.html)

cheers

Title: Cibachrome from digital file
Post by: tim wolcott on June 15, 2010, 06:17:06 pm
You can take it with as many grains of salt you can carry.  My reputation is above reproach.  Most anyone who reads my threads will say that.  

The point of the article is educate everyone to do it the right way.  Any other way than this will hurt the whole photographic industry in the long run.

I believe Michael, John Paul and many many others will back my reputation up.

I have been inventing and creating new ways of printing and photographic equipment for the 19 years.
Title: Cibachrome from digital file
Post by: harlemshooter on June 15, 2010, 07:17:09 pm
"my reputation is above reproach"

this sort of arrogance is simply hilarious, tim. this thread, mind you, isn't about your reputation.

in any forum, accurate and unbiased information, which presents a multitude of perspectives, is king.




Quote from: tim wolcott
You can take it with as many grains of salt you can carry.  My reputation is above reproach.  Most anyone who reads my threads will say that.  

The point of the article is educate everyone to do it the right way.  Any other way than this will hurt the whole photographic industry in the long run.

I believe Michael, John Paul and many many others will back my reputation up.

I have been inventing and creating new ways of printing and photographic equipment for the 19 years.
Title: Cibachrome from digital file
Post by: JamiePeters on June 16, 2010, 01:01:32 am
Sounds like the facts have been presented and this Harlem guy does not like what's being told to him as a fact.  I guess maybe he like ciba's and has an investment in the ciba prints.  This is usually why anyone would back up to an out dated horrible looking process.  When everyone knows including galleries and museums that this process is not worth the paper printed on.

Either that or he just has to argue about everything.  Sounds like he sits there with dictionary looking for big words to use.  

I'm beginning to think this place is not worth your time Tim.    JP
Title: Cibachrome from digital file
Post by: harlemshooter on June 16, 2010, 01:10:15 am
"Sounds like the facts have been presented"

What you mean to say is staunch opinion. I could care less about ciba prints, no interest in them whatsoever. If you'd read my posts you'd realize the facts I'm presenting simply expand upon what is and what isn't harmful to the environment. Wake up boys!

You and your little gang of bedfellows prey on anyone who disagrees with your arrogant, incorrect assumptions.



Quote from: JamiePeters
Sounds like the facts have been presented and this Harlem guy does not like what's being told to him as a fact.  I guess maybe he like ciba's and has an investment in the ciba prints.  This is usually why anyone would back up to an out dated horrible looking process.  When everyone knows including galleries and museums that this process is not worth the paper printed on.

Either that or he just has to argue about everything.  Sounds like he sits there with dictionary looking for big words to use.  

I'm beginning to think this place is not worth your time Tim.    JP
Title: Cibachrome from digital file
Post by: harlemshooter on June 16, 2010, 02:05:02 pm
the OP asked a simple question and this tim wolcott nut makes the following "fact" statements, ironically nearly all of which are only arrogant, nonsensical opinion. it is beyond me why it is impossible for some to consider the relative strengths and weaknesses of their own position.

top seven
"my reputation is above reproach" (nice!)
ciba prints are an "outdated horrible looking process" (not for those who know how to print correctly using this process)
"galleries/museums who know this process is not worth the paper printed on" (incorrect, you clearly know nothing about collection processes)
"wake up Misses Bueller, it also looks fake where as pigment print really have no negatives" (yes, and?)
"so please don't tell me this crap. getting rid of film processing and chemically based prints that have virtually no life expectancy at all, is better?" (who claimed one was better than the other?)
"there is no excuse to make a cibachrome, they are fake looking with poor dynamic range, color replication and can never ever look as good as a pigment print" (opinion)
"christ wake up and smell the coffee misses bueller" (who are you directing these random insults to?)

i agree that ciba prints are harmful to the environment but in addition one should ALSO consider the uber footprint of digital technology. i'm only expanding on that.

again, two pointers to articles citing the grossly underestimated footprint of digital technology:

The monster footprint of digital technology
http://www.lowtechmagazine.com/2009/06/emb...technology.html (http://www.lowtechmagazine.com/2009/06/embodied-energy-of-digital-technology.html)

Environmental challenges in computer manufacturing
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=A...407dc16fea94b0b (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6V7X-43CB8FX-7&_user=10&_coverDate=07%2F31%2F2001&_rdoc=1&_fmt=high&_orig=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_searchStrId=1351746132&_rerunOrigin=google&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=4d2697af0b866e64e407dc16fea94b0b)
Title: Cibachrome from digital file
Post by: tim wolcott on June 18, 2010, 12:44:50 pm
When we invented Evercolor we had nearly zero footprint.  But I guess if you want to analyze everything or anything in the process like our stainless steel trays,  Than there is a footprint.  But its still far cleaner than any other system out there.  Nobody has a zero footprint in anything.  

Sounds like you have a collection of ciba's that are fading away.  You should buy some antiques with termites in them and say they are worth something also.  

Buy the way my background as head print consultant to the Smithsonian, Founder of the Evercolor process and helped invent Pigment Inkjet and that I have shown in most of the best galleries in the world.  I've been showing in AIPAD since 1989.  So yes I know how to print!!!

But I guess the reputation of Henry Wilhelm you are going to argue with also.  Get the facts from Henry or Mark Mc Cormick.  I think they know more than all of us.
Title: Cibachrome from digital file
Post by: harlemshooter on June 18, 2010, 02:44:32 pm
as i said from the beginning of this thread, i have no interest in ciba prints. it simply tickles me silly how arrogant and ignorant your posts read. you are unable to refrain from blasting anyone who questions your staunch opinions or points to the absurdity of your lopsided claims regarding the resultant footprint of digital technology vs analog. re-read this thread if you doubt any of this.

you clearly have no idea as to the massive footprint of the technology which you employ to make your precious digital prints (far more destructive to the environment that all forms of analogue printing processes could have ever achieved together). i make digital prints, am aware of the large scale footprint and am constantly striving for positive change in computer chip manufacturing processes.

manufacturing processes for integrated circuits needs to be re-invented or we will destroy our planet.

THE MONSTER FOOTPRINT OF DIGITAL TECHNOLOGY
http://www.lowtechmagazine.com/2009/06/emb...technology.html (http://www.lowtechmagazine.com/2009/06/embodied-energy-of-digital-technology.html)




Quote from: tim wolcott
When we invented Evercolor we had nearly zero footprint.  But I guess if you want to analyze everything or anything in the process like our stainless steel trays,  Than there is a footprint.  But its still far cleaner than any other system out there.  Nobody has a zero footprint in anything.  

Sounds like you have a collection of ciba's that are fading away.  You should buy some antiques with termites in them and say they are worth something also.  

Buy the way my background as head print consultant to the Smithsonian, Founder of the Evercolor process and helped invent Pigment Inkjet and that I have shown in most of the best galleries in the world.  I've been showing in AIPAD since 1989.  So yes I know how to print!!!

But I guess the reputation of Henry Wilhelm you are going to argue with also.  Get the facts from Henry or Mark Mc Cormick.  I think they know more than all of us.
Title: Cibachrome from digital file
Post by: tim wolcott on June 18, 2010, 05:35:04 pm
So take it up with the computer chip industry.  Again, arrogance has nothing to do about it.  

We at Evercolor, didn't use any chemicals or heavy metals in the process.  The Evercolor process was invented to clean up the color printing process that ciba's and other chemically based color printing processes was part of.  

Our goal was to make green, which we did and make the life expectancy equal to Black and white.  Not even you can argue that fact.

Come to the current time frame and pigments printing still is less pollution than printing a ciba, kodak and fuji or other processes considering the fact that they are nearly all being produced thru light jet, chromira, and Lamda printers.  So yes they are taking resources of the chip manufacturing but they still are producing hugh amounts of chemicals to produce them that is washing down the drain.

Pigments inkjet is only producing the chip manufacturing pollution really.  The rest can be recycled, not sure about chip recycling.  But one printer can print tens of thousands of prints before its retired.

By the way I built the first green gallery in the world and I'm moving it down the street.  



Title: Cibachrome from digital file
Post by: Geoff Wittig on June 21, 2010, 12:54:11 pm
Quote from: tim wolcott
There is no excuse to make a cibachrome,  they are fake looking with poor dynamic range, color replication and can never ever look as good as a pigment print.  So yes you should get your facts right.

Tell me one way that cibachrome is better in anyway than pigment print.  Just one.  Because you can't.  Tim Wolcott

Wow.
Tim, I don't think anyone is questioning your credentials. You do excellent work.
But perhap we can accept some legitimate differences of opinion without getting too personal.

First, let's agree on the things that have a factual basis. When it comes to color prints, I defer to actual evidence of testing and the reports from respected authorities like Henry Wilhelm. It's evident that traditional C-prints have pretty abysmal stability, and fade rapidly unless they're kept in cold storage. Cibachromes/Ilfochromes appear to have quite good dark storage stability compared to C-prints, but will fade when displayed in high ambient light conditions at a rate that depends upon the lumens they are exposed to, as well as the quality of their original processing. Lightjet prints on Fuji Crystal Archive paper appear to be in roughly the same stability ballpark. Pigment inkjet prints appear to have much better stability, with projected lifespans well north of 100 years in many cases. But the operative phrase here is "appear to have". High quality pigment inkjet printing has been around for barely 10 years; all we have to go on is accelerated testing. As Ctein noted in his video interview with Michael a few years ago, we really don't know for certain how stable inkjet prints will turn out to be. It would be prudent to apply a 'scatter factor' of at least 2 to these projections and estimates, because we really don't know with any certainty.

Second, folks may have entirely legitimate (albeit subjective) artistic reasons for preferring Cibachromes/Ilfochromes over inkjet prints. Certainly Ciba's are a major pain to print well, what with the need for contrast masking and finicky color filtering. They have sharpness limitations due to the masking requirement. But an expertly printed Ciba/Ilfochrome has a beauty all its own. The super-glossy finish, rich color and great perceived depth can be perfect for some images. Now, an expertly printed pigment inkjet print on a good fiber-gloss or baryta paper is a beautiful thing. Inkjet prints are all I make personally. But the best glossy/semigloss/fiber-gloss inkjet papers still don't quite match the look of an excellent Ciba/Ilfochrome. The closest thing I've found is Harman FB AL, which is really nice in its own way, but it doesn't have quite the same visual depth.

Your mileage, as always, may vary. Feel free to debate factual issues. But don't slag someone over an artistic judgment or opinion where there's no right or wrong, only different.
Title: Cibachrome from digital file
Post by: Ben Rubinstein on June 23, 2010, 08:21:32 am
Anyone else hate the look of inkjet with a passion? I'd take a chemical print any day of the month...
Title: Cibachrome from digital file
Post by: DarkPenguin on June 23, 2010, 09:22:10 am
Quote from: Ben Rubinstein
Anyone else hate the look of inkjet with a passion? I'd take a chemical print any day of the month...

Depends on the paper and printer.
Title: Cibachrome from digital file
Post by: Ben Rubinstein on June 23, 2010, 09:55:04 am
The stuff I've had done for me was Epson 3800 and Harman Baryta paper. Just hate the look of the ink lying on top of the paper rather than the image being within the paper as with chemical prints.
Title: Cibachrome from digital file
Post by: tsjanik on June 23, 2010, 10:48:03 pm
Quote from: Ben Rubinstein
Anyone else hate the look of inkjet with a passion? I'd take a chemical print any day of the month...

Well I donít hate it, but if I could print Cibachrome with the ease and control I have with Ilford Gold Silk on an Epson, Iíd chose the Cibachrome without hesitation.

Ben: I have printed on transparency film and then mounted on a white paper background in an attempt to achieve the depth you mentioned; it works, since you see color from both the light reflected off the print and the backing, but sharpness suffers a bit.
Title: Cibachrome from digital file
Post by: DarkPenguin on June 24, 2010, 09:22:59 pm
Quote from: Ben Rubinstein
The stuff I've had done for me was Epson 3800 and Harman Baryta paper. Just hate the look of the ink lying on top of the paper rather than the image being within the paper as with chemical prints.

If there isn't a lot of gloss differential or bronzing I quite like the look of ink on top of the paper.  At least if the paper is nice like Silver Rag or the FB-AL stuff.
Title: Cibachrome from digital file
Post by: Randy Carone on July 09, 2010, 04:25:56 pm
Back to the OP, here is a document that gives one route to the emulation of a Cibachrome/Ilfochrome print. I have done this using Roland's white high gloss PETG film and polyester laminate with excellent results. The look of Cibachrome and the longevity of pigment ink. [attachment=23047:Cibachrome.pdf]
Title: Re: Cibachrome from digital file
Post by: willbeep on February 03, 2011, 03:19:47 pm
I have cibachrome prints that have been stored using no extraordinary measures and in over 30 years show no fading or deteriation.
Title: Re: Cibachrome from digital file
Post by: iamacamera on October 04, 2011, 03:00:32 pm
I printed Ciba's in my personal darkroom for years, and still would if the materials were easily available.  I started printing them in 1976, with all the accompanying masks, and the early prints show no fading.  If the Cibas are fading I would question if they were washed properly at the end of the chemical steps or if all the chems were up to specs.  As to the issue of polluting the water supply.  I was told that the later chemicals neutralize the earlier chemicals.  E.G.  that the bleach neutralizes the developer and the fixer neutralizes the earlier two steps making them neutral as chemicals.  They used to include neutralizing tablets to be place in the chems at the end of the process.  I really like the Ciba/Ilfochrome process and liked the fact that each print was a "one off" print, unlike prints from digital files which are, in theory, an exact duplicate of any earlier iterations.  There is, in my opinion, a benefit in the fact that each successive print is unlike the earlier prints simply because, no matter how good and diligent you are, you will not ever do everything exactly the same each time.  Now I'm in the position of either not getting prints from color film or having them scanned and making a Fuji Crystal Archive print.  They look okay but I prefer the other process.