Category: dye transfer

the Dye Guy

Posted on Posted in da net, dye transfer, minimum daily requirement, the fora

If you are of the internet age, of those who know more about dye transfer as a mystic process from a distant age. As a process steeped in, and dripping with the badge of chemical craft — meticulous step by step make no error darkroom work, then you probably know few names of its thousands of practitioners.

You know those who have been proclaimed by the forums as keepers of the skill. They aren’t the folks I knew. Of course I knew of Eliot Porter, but then I also knew of his assistants as well as some of the printers who worked at the labs who printed for him.

The photographer most people know is William Eggleston. A man of many printers.

The person most of you from the pop-photo, camera store, workshop trained photographers have heard of is Ctein. He isn’t the person I think of as the main dye guy. To me, he is a tech writer who was given work by Frank McLaughlin of Kodak.

I have mixed feelings about this post. Ctein can’t do any harm — neither can he do any good — not for you, not if you are trying to learn about making prints. The information of doing that exists in better, more usable form in several books and places. The process as it is done in this century is fading again. The last orthomatrix film coating was in 2018. That was done by a coater that no longer has the equipment used for that type coating.

What bothers me is the sense of privilege along with the power given to someone who spent so much time staking claim to a skill so widely held — an ability to make prints many times more often, to even higher demands with a seemingly endless array of problems. A commercial lab doesn’t often reject possible clients. Our success was based upon solving a clients problem, not by setting out the reason we wouldn’t take their job. “we’d have to change a printer”

limitations … perhaps after years doing dyes didn’t provide enough profit to afford two printers in his second stage..

he doesn’t have to tell his story; others will repeat it. By association they gain favor.

“I know great people, must mean I’m a great person.”

So, what’s my problem. None. I understand all of this — I even understand that you will not change your viewpoint. You shouldn’t.

Too bad you never met the real dye guys. Too bad you never became one.

Lost Highlights

Posted on Posted in alt photo, dye transfer, labnotes, morning wood, pipeline, the fora

highlights can be washed away or crushed in assembly — huh? Okay, they can, but not if you are making dye transfers correctly.

Dye transfer was used by commercial photographers doing flatware, silk goods, diamonds, crystal — it seemed good enough for those highlight intensive products photos used for point of purchase along with sample books.

Dye transfer was used by portrait photographers selling upscale bridal portraits for their wedding — the 20×24 for the family to remember the bride in her white wedding gown. Another highlight intensive requirement.

Further examples seem unnecessary. The large-format dye transfer expert isn’t experienced. Sadly, those involved in that conversation don’t know enough to know — maybe they just don’t care, since they’ve nothing else to do. It is after all, only chat among the idle — an endgame move of resignation.

Why do so many believe the persistent posters?

The difference between a carbon print and a dye transfer is extreme. That they are assembly processes using gelatin as the image carrier, and that the image is a result of differential hardening of gelatin is what they share. Exposure method is a major factor in how highlights are maintained or lost.

In pigment processes exposure is from the top of the emulsion/coating. In dye transfer (imbibition ) exposure is through the base; this means the gelatin is hardened from the support upward. The highlight is thin but it is close to the support. In carbon the highlight tends to wash off, since it is being dissolved away. The pigment will actually collapse. The dye transfer mat has a relief image but it is durable. In imbibition printing the final image is assembled in thin layers; in gum/carbon it is stacked up in thicker reliefs. This can, likely will, result in some undercut of fine color details which occur alongside larger detail areas. In an effort to reduce this problem, screened negatives are being used by some carbon printers.

Dye transfer has additional controls to manage highlights which provide even more advantage over carbon printing. Carbon’s advantage is the tissue is easier to make than matrix film. Carbon rules because it can; it’s’ disadvantages have been made a part of the aesthetic feature: lots of “dimensional” texture.