Secret Dye Transfer School

This is an expanded version of { Everyone loves a secret…. } with questions.
Avoid tidepools of inactivity; don’t get caught in their stagnation.

THE SECRET IS: TRY. NO SCHOOL TEACHES COURAGE.

The secret case of Eggs. You cook eggs at home, getting very good over the first dozen. A chef trained at CIA will cook that dozen eggs several ways in their first morning. The secret is variation — faster feedback between effort and result.

How to poach an egg… or, how I poach an egg… based upon its size, use of poach … cooking is easy, but it is a manual skill. The analogy should be obvious. I would never spend time trying to teach someone how to cook, if they are afraid of making mistakes. The arrogant amateur is deadly in a commercial lab.

Commercial labs had more information, more experience than Kodak about the the use of dye transfer materials. We even told them about ways of correcting the magenta dye (restrainer). Labs experimented more frequently. The bigger the lab, the more varied the requests. Full shift labs had more types of products. Only small labs specialized in dyes . No one kept secrets from anyone else. okay, we tried to keep client lists hidden. At least we didn’t publish them.

Big labs probably came to dye transfer after it became a mature, consistent product. Mixed dyes was the first success. Type C’s, Printons, dupes, etc … these products provided the profit for dye transfer to be a service. Dyes were, for the most part, a glory part. Those in “pickle alley” specialized in dyes almost to the product type; their photographer clients did, so they did.

Kodak made different papers …one retouchers and illustrators preferred, another popular in portrait studios, and the common one, Type F.

Would you take a class to learn dye transfer printing? Would it take you nearly 20 years to make your first print? If it did, whose problem is that? Suppose you bought the supplies, the books, equipped a lab; all that, yet you never used a box of the material. What secret kept you from trying to print?

In my experience, I have never known anyone to succeed without ernest initial effort. With dye transfer, the printers who make their third print within the first week of effort get the furthest. These are the printers that are solving new, more complex problems for most of their thousand image career.

Frequently, timid people never acquire the skills they think they should. AFter all, they are literate; they collect information, data sheets, magazine articles. Every article they read tells them of the difficulties, as the author promises great reward. What a view from the heights.

https://www.photrio.com/forum/search/754152/

Prints? Uncovered conspiracy?

IB Photochemistry — from Aug, 2007 to Feb, 2025 – a very long journey getting to a point of.. what… what does he have? A manual from a small Northern California lab. This manual reveals: the answers are on their wall placards, not in this document. [ may be Garelick, or Teoli]

someone spending time uncovering a conspiracy… of their invention?

Lack of knowledge doesn’t mean someone is hiding it from you. Lack of experience is your failure.

How many prints do you think he has made?

Kodak had a training facility in Rochester. It served their marketing group’s learning needs . The dye transfer commercial labs didn’t learn from that facility. In-house, industrial labs like GE, or GM, etc went there. Labs with many dye transfer employees wouldn’t go — the information would have been geared to too low level. MEC was opened in 1972. What did all those labs, the largest of which began before 1960, do for learning before ’72?

Multiiple shift, commercial dye labs, had wider range of experience than Kodak. We saw many problems, having to solve them with elegant, complete answers — usually at a small profit. We optimised by experience. Knew more by doing more.

big labs had a head start. They had employees who had learned in the forties … were running sections in the 50s. The process experience transcended single-vendor, single product type.

Theory was studied in service to experience.

  • Try it..
  • if it doesn’t work, explain
  • write it up…
  • stick it on the wall

Kodak Lab Days.

Kodak changed over the decades of my contact with them. In the 60s, they seemed very accessible. By the 80s there seemed less knowledge, but with more datasheets. Instead of information, they provided brochures… many handouts.

Frank M. –[ someday, more..]

Kodak’s final days … from letter sent to labs in their marketing mailings list.

We also received such things as:

  • CIS Current Information Summaries
  • and my favorites: From the desk of — the best were from Jeannette, Frank, Louis, Bob S., “girl group”

this day in 1898, the U.S. Supreme Court, in United States v. Wong Kim Ark, ruled 6-2 that Wong, who was born in the United States to Chinese immigrants, was an American citizen. It was the first Supreme Court decision to rule on the citizenship status of a child born in the U.S. to noncitizen parents.

To the Wileys-and-Garelicks: please, get the dates correct; woth that achieved, your data may make sense.

Possible set of dates: 1936 – 1957 [ much foundation; most of the theory] 1957-1977[ the changing nature of Kodak along with the nature oc the commercial color lab] . Next, the dates become, in my file folders: 1981, 1986, 1988, 1991, 1996.

taking notice: Ingrid Pollard

in the morning IG feed, from someone I follow but don’t know; didn’t know very much about, even. They posted (ukegirl99 ingy pingy) about being awarded the Hasselblad award for 2024. I looked, but didn’t follow up… I don’t put note to the Hasselblad awards, thinking them commercial achievement.

It is easy to overlook things in a world of many things to look at. We look quickly. I do — even though I restrict how much hits my screen — enters my world of books. I know that if I’ve seen her work, the early work, I wouldn’t have noted it, even though the hand-coloring would have appealed. Work has to sustain the artist longer than is usually possible.

Awards make the work something to re-visit. That is more valuable than the dollar amount. In preparing this note to myself, I dug into the Hasselblad award enough to give it value; value because of the artists they have recognized. In one sense, that is what the company+foundation probably hopes happens.

That was that. In reading my email, intending to delete the Hasselblad cast, I saw more about Ingrid Pollard, and the award. Seeing more, I looked for more. Her site: http://www.ingridpollard.com/ No mention, the news is more recent than the website “news” section.

That will change.

[In the video, she recounts her “notification” story. At first, on the phone, she doubted the veracity. It took the email to convince her. In an eWorld, even the one connected because of the phones, we doubt the voice on the other end of the line. Sound isn’t the eye. We prefer text. That thing we can read, show, share. The sound of the distant other is gone in a click.]

From the email: the Hasselblad Award honours individuals whose work significantly impacts the field and pushes artistic boundaries. Ingrid Pollard, the 44th recipient of the Hasselblad Award, joins an exclusive group of previous Hasselblad Award laureates, including Ansel Adams (1981), Cindy Sherman (1994), Hiroshi Sugimoto (2001), Dayanita Singh (2022), and 2023 laureate, Carrie Mae Weems.

Quite a list. Diverse, brought about by the years of an expanding photography world.

  • 1981, Adams. USD 20,000. “With clarity and precision, he visualized the spectacular vistas and rich native details of the Western United States. In 1942 Ansel Adams developed the “zone system” which employs careful sensitometric control and adjustments of exposure and development. As an artist, a teacher, and a master of photographic technique, Ansel Adams’ influence has been felt by successive generations of photographers from all over the world.”

  • 1999, Sherman. SEK 500,000. “Much of her work has been concerned with the position of women in a consumerist and media-driven society, and with the ironies and contradictions of contemporary women’s lives. She can also be seen as a significant “re-inventor” of two important traditions in photographic art – the photo surrealism of the 1930s and the photo-based conceptual art of the 1960s. Cindy Sherman’s influence on successive generations of artists and photographers has been, and continues to be, immense.

  • 2001, Sugimoto.  SEK 500,000. “Inspired by Renaissance paintings and early 19th century photography, and using a large format camera, Sugimoto achieves a wide range of tones in a body of work that reflects his great love of detail, his outstanding technical mastery and – above all – his fascination with the paradoxes of time.”

  • 2022, Singh. SEK 2,000,000. ““Through photography she records and shapes the stories told within the structure of the archive before turning it into a new form. Her works are moving in several senses of the word: the audience is both touched by and is encouraged to touch the images. “ https://youtu.be/3tgMr5lnA3c?si=PEWKChMlfqlH_Wkk

  • 2023. Weems. SEK 2,000,000. ” “When Carrie Mae Weems first appeared on the scene four decades ago, her work was instantly iconic, even if it took time for the world to recognize it as such. As her vision has evolved in intuitive, unpredictable ways, it has only become more essential.” –-Jury chair, Joshua Chuang