kwik-print was

Kwik-Print is another process you can’t do — the materials are not available. Unlike dye-imbibition, there aren’t enough records to devise the same product. The general procedures can certainly be re-issued. It was a simplified gum-pigment process, even though it was not gum arabic based. KP was an assembly process used by commercial printers as a proofing system. As such it found ready home for use within schools teaching any of the assembly processes.

NB: if you would like me to post a page2 with directions, push the like. With enough interest shown, it will happen

It was part of the Peak Know-How of 1978. Kwi-Print providing early access to color making for those who can’t draw and otherwise avoid painting. Kwik-Print was an assembly process; in that regard it was similar to dye-transfer, as were several hundred color making processes in the earliest years of photography-mechanical processes. Reviewers likened it to the Fresson Quadirchromie process — not so, since Kwik-Print wasn’t based upon pigments — likely they were inksets. No patent was ever filed for the process in any of its trademarked forms; neither by Direct Reproductions, nor Light Impressions.

The process was not patented. The product trademarks were the only protection for Direct Reproduction Corps. small business.


kwik proof by Samuel Sacks 1941

A telltale aspect of the kwi-Print was the synthetic “paper” support used. It was easier than similar processes such as gum-arabic, since the emulsion came ready to use; no grinding, no mixing. Synthetic wipes were used to apply coating to the synthetic paper which dried quickly without shrinkage. A multicolor print could be completed in minutes rather than hours as with gum prints.

Contrast of sheets: the receiver sheets affected contrast of the image; they were offered in three distinct grades of contrast. These sheets had code-notches to mark them, however, since the contrast change was due to the surface sheen/ diffusion (see callier) examining the sheet by raked light told which was high or low contrast — how shiny did it seem; how smooth did it feel.

So, why read about it? Sometimes the past reveals a future. Procedures change, shift, die — theory never dies, it transforms.

a short time on photography’s craft stage. it was part of the alternative life phase of Rochester’s boom years. Taking part in the silver-rush seventies by adding color without Kodak and friends.

How processes take hold; what it took for Kwik-Print.

  • It must be simple enough to learn within a short time such as a workshop
  • It is stronger if introduced in a time of growth among the arts community — the 70s was the explosion of photography into art schools.
  • It needs an advocate able to say, do and show what and how the process fits into that time
  • It helps if there is a strong commercial need of the process. Kwik-Proof was re-badged from the commercial printing trade where it was used for several decades. At the time of its conversion to the fine-art, solo studio practitioner, it was falling from use.

Before Post-Factory was alt=photography. Before that was non-silver imaging.

Bea Nettles was the proponent of the Kwik-Print stage of pigment printing. It was sold as kit and as individual items. Kwik-Print was a modification of the Kwik-Proof graphic arts product originated and sold by Direct Reproductions Corporation, Brooklyn,N.Y. The colorants used were not designed for permanence under display conditions. Keep em covered.

Light Impressions, 131 Gould Street, Rochester, NY was the large scale supplier to the fine-art photographers, ie, those educated in the art schools that seemed endless during the growth of gallery photography.

Some of the who:

bea nettles (b.1946 -) — a key advocate. She brought the Direct Reproduction Corporation product to the handmade emulsion community via Light Impressions.

watercote: The American Photo Engraver, Volume 49, 1957

the graphic trademarks for Direct Reproduction Corporation.

The trademarks for Kwik-Proof, along with the unfinished application for Kwik-Print.

Knowing where to look comes before finding.

Interested about the past? A common first thought is ask the web. As part of a continuing task of checking cultural progress, I asked 4 published bots. My request and the response follow:

AI thinks “emulsion” means silk-screen. Becoming over-confident about its comprehension of “light impressions.” the best answer among the current crust of AI engines. [12,25] Yet another false start. Confident, but wrong. Not even close to accurate.

The internet past is restricted to the 21st century. The printed page was not digitized. Try asking a librarian for the information. Librarians at large research libraries have extensive resources.

My first searches are to my bookshelves, then to online known reference sites.

Never ask a passing bot; never ask a hobby spot, even if this is “just” a hobby.

NB: Phantom Markets

The depth of products for photographers, particularly darkoom equipment, declined rapidly in the 90s, the time that most of the current beginners opened their eyes. Providing information about how things were done is more useful if provided with enough background to provide grounding. Rather than tieing their laces together, shut up.

Everyone asks for “it” — upon its production, most have a reason for no longer needing it…

So, the boxes of knowledge weren’t needed.

Amateurs make more requests than most makers can satisfy. As a market declines requests are as likely to be fantasy, role playing more likely. These assumed buyers flee, actually, they never existed. They were suspects, not prospects. No way to close that deal. Most online communities are intended as gossip centers. Sales talk. Buy and sell is the way of exchange. Few members have depth of experience. Most members, most people, even those declaring themself curious, have a narrow decade of knowledge… frequently, craft-skill is more limited than academic transferable awareness; even this is lost after a decade of disuse.

What we have is a gathering of curious, unskilled people passing on hearsay as teaching.

Peak commercial darkroom equipment sales was in 1979. The commercial, custom printers knew this; honest sales reps were quite clear about upcoming deals to be made, going so far as advising other avenues of purchase.

How Groups Grow: dilution or distribution of effort. Online communities cluster in skill pools much as occurred in regional settings . These skill pools are never culture-free clusters.


The AGO Film Processor and B’s Processor are both designed for home film development, but they differ in functionality and design. The AGO offers automated agitation and is compatible with Paterson tanks, while the B’s Processor rotates the entire tank and is known for its compact size and ease of use. Here’s a comprehensive comparison of the Ago Film Processor, B’s, Jobo Silverbase, and Pira Darkroom Helper based on their functionalities and notable features.


Feature Ago Film Processor B’s Film Processor Jobo Silverbase Pira Darkroom Helper
Type Automatic rotary processor Standard processing unit Compact rotary processor Darkroom assistant tool
Compatibility Works with Paterson tanks Various standard tanks Compatible with JOBO 1500 series tanks Designed for darkroom setup
Film Formats 35mm, 120, custom reels 35mm 35mm, 120, 4×5 Various formats
Temperature Control Adjusts development time automatically based on temperature Manual control No water jacket; suitable for room temp Not applicable
Programming Pre-loaded programs; customizable Manual timing Automatic rotation with set speeds Generic darkroom support
Power Source Battery operated AC powered AC powered Not applicable
Cost Approximately $500 USD Varies (generally lower) Approximately $515.90 USD Not applicable
Suitability for B&W Excellent for B&W and color Primarily B&W Designed for B&W film processing Focused on assisting darkroom tasks
User Experience Easy temperature and time adjustment Requires manual intervention User-friendly rotary agitation Supports various darkroom processes

Detailed Insights

Ago Film Processor

  • Technology: It automatically adjusts development times based on temperature fluctuations. It can optimize processing for various color and black-and-white films.
  • User Experience: Battery-operated, allowing flexible usage in small spaces.
  • Pros:
    • Automatically compensates for temperature variations.
    • Includes pre-loaded programs for diverse chemical kits.
    • Efficient for both black-and-white and color processing.

B’s Film Processor

  • Technology: A more traditional processing unit, requiring manual timing adjustments.
  • User Experience: Generally more affordable but less feature-rich.
  • Pros:
    • Cost-effective option for users who do not require advanced features.Around $145
    • Simpler operation for those familiar with manual processing.

Jobo Silverbase

  • Technology: Rotary processor that employs magnetic rotating for even chemical distribution without a water jacket.
  • User Experience: Known for its compact design and efficiency, particularly for black-and-white films.
  • Pros:
    • Compact and user-friendly.
    • Excellent reproducibility of results.
    • Allows use of less developer with one-shot solutions.

Pira.mx Darkroom Helper

  • Estimated cost $250

Basing a product on Jobo or Patterson seems safe. Jobo having vocal suppoters, Patterson being owned by a larger manufacturer with multiple product lines.