Last Dyes

The last dyes are like embers from the fading analog engine. The revivalists are rushing to ride the final fashion like Lauren Lauren’s Leica slung, long lean strappy dangling from her pampered bridal shoulder. Both, she and her camera, accessorizing his success.

Dye transfer prints will decorate many a wall. Some may hang for most of the year.

THE REAL : The show — meaning from the real world. The gallery world seeming more connected to factual effort.

Dye Transfer had an early glow, mystery of process, mystique of object value. The process was time and material consuming, making it in the fuller sense something for advertising, appealing as Veblen Good to the Haute Bourgeoisie.

“I was reading the price list of this lab in Chicago and it advertised ‘from the cheapest to the ultimate print’. The ultimate print was a dye-transfer…. The color saturation and the quality of the ink was overwhelming. I couldn’t wait to see what a plain Eggleston picture would look like with the same process. Every photograph I subsequently printed with the process seemed … better than the previous one.” —William Eggleston in conversation with editor and writer Mark Holborn, 1991

:

CVI, Color Vision Imaging laboratory, Manhattan, 1981. Guy Stricherz (b. 1948) graduated from western Washington University in 1974. He went to New York city in 1977 to work for Frank Tartaro who was one of a dozen masterful printers. Even at that time the process was falling out of use. It had peaked by 1980. Irene Malli (b. 1964) graduated from Cooper Union; after graduation she worked as a printer before answering an ad for CVI in 1989. CVI was moved to Vashon Island from NYC in 2004. Some of their recent clients: Larry Burrows, Bruce Davidson, Thomas Demand, William Eggleston, Mitch Epstein, Ernst Haas, Hiro, Evelyn Hofer, Graziela Iturbide, Zoe Leonard, Arnold Newman, Irving Penn, Christopher Williams.

Frank Tartaro was another user of the idea of “tone zone” masking.


The best memory is based upon your experience. Make your own.

THE IMAGINED: Unfortunately The Last Dyes show brings out the zombie experts of the hobby forums. Killers of a process they view from sideline. The show provides opportunity to talk as tho they had a privileged seat; bring out their old bar counter stories, a chance to repeat their prejudices of process. This is the use for the brag boards.

Question the tale of the salesman. I didn’t call him on his bullshit, so you have been left with his constant crap for a decade. Mea Culpa.

They don’t learn enough because they don’t ask, they aren’t curious. They don’t do enough because they lack courage. They fear failure more than they crave doing.

The false information is imprinted onto the naive minds. False tales aren’t questions, even though he is doubted. Why trust any part of his complex tale if the beginning direction is in error. Part of his ongoing commitment to his fantasy story of his skill is due to my being so bored with him at the St. Regis meeting, I fed him his own ignorance agreeing in order to escape. No one used Tanning Bleach in a commercial practice past 1952 — the mats weren’t sharp, nor durable enough for the uses of commercial printing. There was one use of tanning bleach: schools doing Pan Matrix film– this was rare, caused by group darkroom restrictions. AND the Army never made Matrix Film; they did buy it, while after Korean War, the Department of Defense sold the surplus materials. K&L (Len Z.) bought thousands of sheets which gave him a price advantage for several years.

The Army doesn’t make sandbags nor shoelaces. Not even CCA made their materials; they did have a need for large “trans” materials which Kodak refused to make. They couldn’t. They didn’t have the ready knowledge, so CCA tried two different coaters; NG was able to make the materials using a design provided them by Robert M. of Defender.

Lasting Lie Transfers: turning sales speak into history. The story is now being told by people who didn’t even participate until the story was over
eggleston show brings out stale fish stories; stolen valor from the photo fantists

  • “he was a machinist ” — about Eliot Porter; he wasn’t a machinist. His mode of making DTs didn’t require him to have “made his own” transfer equipment. He was a long time woodworker. He discovered the “black box” printing system. His self-made items are all wooden. No metal, no punch-pin system.
  • ” soft image– dye bleed” — the reason Condax was brought into Kodak was because of the improvement of Tanning Development over Bleach Tanning. Two immediate improvements: sharpness of transferred image, and improved color clarity with existing dyes.
  • ” don’t hold highlights well” — hmm, how about all those suds and softgoods ads? Or, Eggleston’s White Ceiling Fan.
dye diffusion effect

a piece of the elaborate custom equipment made by Eliot Porter for his dye transfer lab.


Google has found my post from 2013, titled: The Last Dye Transfers .. coincidence a long time coming

For those considering another possible use of matrix film– think it as a mask. I did. See this patent which I’d discovered around 1961: https://patents.google.com/patent/US2371746

Expert Agitation Advice

kinetics. induction period. specific agent, ex: phenidone [mees, 1969]. Chemical processing is a mechanical process. Rates and timing of agitation, of exchanging chemistry across the image will alter the shape of the characteristic curve. [I have curves showing the effects; pondering their posting]

Agitation is one of the two commonly misplaced skills of developing. The other is water– purity and bubbles.

Many of the early errors are errors of judgement, then of mechanics. You are using too little chemistry, relying upon equipment designed to save chemistry as it provides ready salvation of all your space limitations. This makes the task of getting the film fully saturated with chemistry and chemistry only more difficult. Success is requires the film is evenly wet and equally swollen evenly and quickly. Immersion of the film into the chems, coupled with agitation during this stage will solve the first dozen errors of processing your film.

I learned by adage; this one was from processing in dye transfer labs: “Mix for four, use three” — meaning mix enough chems to process 4 sheets of film, but only put 3 sheets through the chems.

i can’t convince you that what you do doesn’t work, although most descriptions of action seem to hold to an error, so your modification is a correction of your error — at times, these errors are because of the equipment , not your usage, more often the mistake is a result of agitation of the processing chemistry.

What does wetting the emulsion before developing do, achieve? Is it essential or chicken bones in the campfire. I have pre-soaked as an experiment. I don’t presoak for my work, nor for any commercial client. I don’t use water with “bubbles” in it; let it stand before adding other chemicals, even when diluting stock chemicals.

I modify the tanks used in souping rollfilm by sticking silicon bumpers to the inside bottom of the tank;this modification provides space for chemicals to flow across the bottom of the reel.

Chemistry must surround the emulsion for even processing. The critical image former is developer — the latent image must be amplified by chemical means.

Laminar flow was implemented in a small scale way for the home color print market by Agnecolor [*]

[spiral ribs wash more of surface without ‘tracks’ of trapped chems. — print drums]

How long does an emulsion have to be wet before achieving maximum swell? The emulsion isn’t fully expanded until washing. Notice that it shrinks in fixer. Water keeps the emulsion swollen. The following illustration tracks this over time and at three different temperatures. It was conducted as part of research on emulsion hardening and need for supplementary harderners. Some emulsionists devised wetting agents and antifoam additions to film to address the problems of widely different water conditions their product would encounter in the wild.

Pre-soak. Pre-wet. Ilford or Kodak. Tray, tank, burst, reels. Air bells. Pinholes. Uneven development. Pyro in the sky with Jobos.

Dye Transfer as learning lab

Masks, separations, matrix film: ortho, or pan each has such difference that an experiment, once run, wasn’t run more often. Making masks, in various forms, on variety of film types, would seem to be a great circumstance to realize any gains in pre-soak. Short development time, required evenness of tone-sets, avoiding any processor defect, all these seem prompt for initial wetting. I didn’t know about it when I started, and in none of the labs where I first worked was it used. Of course, none of these places used Jobos, or other “can and roll” processing modes.

One client funded researching pre-soaking matrix film. They wanted to process mats in daylight drums purposed from color RC processing. They hoped to be able to load pan-matrix film in exposure cube, then process in a larger wetroom. We achieved some success, enough that the client was happy to hire me again. The method required presoaking the Pan Matrix film in an antifog / restrainer solution. Loading the drum with “knurled rubber fingers” — time in this mix was 4 minutes, followed by a rinse in distilled water, finally the matrix developer for much lengthened processing time.

I never used the procedure in my work, nor did I teach it to any other lab.

Does an expert have expertise in all things? Clearly not. Does an expert in the field have expertise across the entirety of use? Only if they phrase their answer specifically to a question rather than the entire topic possible. So, does” pre-soaking harm BW emulsions” is different than “is pre-saoking necessary to maximize results” — In my experience evolution from a self-informed dye transfer maker in 1960 to now, 2024, I have gained enough observation to know that agitation systems have more effect than almost any other part of what the user of emulsions does. Agitation is amplification; it is limited, and so must be altered to mate material and mechanism — a Jobo has limitations. As does a tray, a shallow tank, or burst system. I have never used a Jobo, although a Merz featured prominently in two different labs I managed.

Tray AGITATION. plating shuffle. wet hand, dry hand. having a start sheet-code with many. depth of liquid — more is better.

PRE-SOAK– solves wetting because too little chem, and-or too little agitation at developer induction — the physical part of film getting wet. water is the ‘universal solvent’ in photography — color emulsions have development modifiers within their layers; these activate, diluted, they don’t act as designed as part of ’emulsion + developer’ system.

if tray processing film sticks, you aren’t using enough time (10 or 15 second) steps between sheets in the stack. most people use too shallow a chem for the stack, also, they put them into the dev too rapid a sequence. 

i usually used a scavenger sheet of film on the bottom of the tray.

Additional on processing drum systems:

Read these patents, then estimate the contribution made by Jobo.

1960, Siegel, the tank method of processing
Merz Film Processor, 1972
Merz processor, transport improvement, 1976
Merz Processor, 1977