analog printing slides

allenying · Apr 15, 2015

i'm sorry if this has been covered, but is there no way to directly print slides in the darkroom anymore?
i now shoot negative film, but i shot primarily slide film for about 10 years, the magazines that were publishing my work were drum scanning.
now i'm getting pretty annoyed with digital printing, primarily with figuring out how much to sharpen scans, and how it differs from on screen to digital c prints on luster paper to pigment prints on hahnemuhle photo rag.

thanks,

rowghani · Apr 15, 2015

I'd love to know as well. Can you point us in the right direction user 19?

bvy · Apr 15, 2015

Cibachrome/Ilfochrome were the processes that enabled optical printing of slides. They have been discontinued. The chemicals and paper can still be found, but it's a crapshoot, and an expensive one. The best alternatives are RA-4 reversal printing, and making internegatives from your slides to enlarge or contact print using traditional RA-4.

Again, lots written here and elsewhere about this. You can pick out some search keywords from the text above to read more.

DREW WILEY · Apr 15, 2015

Making internegs is going to be a tough hill to climb. Does anyone do it? I've run a few experiments with Portra 160 as an interneg film, which shows hypothetical promise; but doing it well involves masking the chrome and having the right kind of gear, which I fortunately do have, but not the extra time to fine-tune yet another "what if" project. Some chrome films seem more responsive than others. Expect hell from Velvia with its very unforgiving high contrast. Even back in the heyday of optical printing, very few commercial labs made decent internegs. It takes more than just a slide copier and some color neg film. And trying to learn Cibachrome at this point in time is like paying for an African safari and expecting to shoot a Triceratops. It just ain't going to happen.

allenying · Apr 15, 2015

thanks,
i read some stuff on apug before posting, but it all seemed a few years old, so i was wondering if there was any update...

... how internegs compare to what direct optical prints from slides were like, or color neg prints, or digital c prints, or digital pigment prints, or how well it works to use something like portra 160 as an interneg, if anyone's really tried it or is doing it. if that's really too complicated, that's good to know.

was fuji type 35 paper for the cibachrome process? it seems like it was another positive to positive process.

it's just sad to make digital prints when sharpness can vary so much, and not really having a traditional print to reference, i feel so much of the photography out there these days is artificially sharpened.

it seems like there's no reason for any of us to read old material if it's just not possible or practical to get the results that they used to get, and accept that digital has killed it off?

rowghani · Apr 16, 2015

Im completely in the same boat. Thanks for the previous posts. Ill definitely look into it.

rowghani · Apr 16, 2015

I am surprised that Cibachrome isn't still offered at a reduced quantity or high price. I know of many people who would still use it. I guess the manufacturing costs are too high even to just make small amounts.

Question for the pros: Has anybody tried internegs in the RA4 process and was satisfying with the results compared to digital prints?

pdeeh · Apr 16, 2015

Are Cibachrome threads the new Kodachrome threads ?

bvy · Apr 16, 2015

pdeeh said:
Are Cibachrome threads the new Kodachrome threads ?

I hope so.

ulysses · Apr 17, 2015

I have an unopened box of 8x10 Fuji reversal paper in the freezer. You'd have to figure out how to process it.

DREW WILEY · Apr 17, 2015

There is nothing complicated in principle making internegs. You're just copying your slides by shooting them with something like Portra 160
and then developing these in ordinary C41, then printed on ordinary RA4 paper. The devil is in the details when you first make the copy.
Chrome and neg film don't dance well together. They both want to lead, and keep tripping over each other in terms of gamut, contrast, etc.
Getting a compatible match that comes out looking nice takes some experience and generally some serious prep work, like knowing how to
silver mask for this. In other words, getting recognizable results is easy, getting good results is a much more complicated subject.

rowghani · Apr 17, 2015

Hey drew, so when shooting the slides does the c41 film have the ability to hold that slide look? Or will it look like you shot it in c41 to begin with? That would seem un necessary as you could just shoot c41 to begin with. Thanks.

DREW WILEY · Apr 17, 2015

You aren't photographing skintones or typical hues the film was engineered for, but the color dyes inherent to the chrome image itself. So you have to learn how to get them to dance together. Some chrome films are more compatible than others. Velvia is a headache, though I have gotten results. I contact print sheet film, and enlarge smaller film onto sheet film. But I have some very precise equipment, am highly experienced in corrective masking, and still have a ways to go for the results I want. There's no protocol out there. Actual interneg films are either extinct or probably too old to be reliable. Fuji might still make ITN in Japan, but it's not available here. Portra 160 has the proper
potential, but fine-tuning it would require a bit different procedure with almost every chrome film type and even individual subject. Sure you could just buy a simple camera-mounted slide copier and do it that way, but the results would be mediocre.

rowghani · Apr 18, 2015

Understood. Seems like a very steep learning curve.

allenying · Apr 20, 2015

i called fujifilm.
these are my notes from the call about the papers they make:

type 2 paper
comes in sheets
made for darkroom optical printing
has a layer that allowed for optical printing with an enlarger to be sharper

super type cn - glossy and matte
super type pdn - luster - thicker than type cn
(what b&h has listed is slightly inconsistent with these notes from my call with fuji, in terms of what's available glossy, luster, or matte)
comes in rolls only
optimized for led and laser exposure - deeper blacks and the sharper layer removed since it wasn’t necessary - not a huge difference.

for positive to positive printing
type 35 paper
R3 chemistry
no chemistry or paper available anymore
not exactly same as ilfochrome or cibachrome process

i plan to call kodak next.

out of curiosity, was the R3 chemistry process with type 35 paper completely different than the ilfochrome or cibachrome process?

DREW WILEY · Apr 20, 2015

Ilfo/Cibachrome had no relation to Type R printing. The latter was the "reversal" technique for chromogenic papers. It was a fairly inexpensive way to print slides and once offered by several manufacturers. Some people are experimenting with trying to reverse current RA4 chromogenic paper ordinarily use for printing color negatives. Cibachrome was a modernized version of "chromolytic" paper (actually polyester sheeting), meaning high-quality dyes were already incorporated into the paper, then selectively removed via "dye destruction" via a strong sulfuric acid bleach. Then you had the more complex methods of "assembly" printing, meaning each color layer had to be separately processed then printed all together, like dye transfer printing, which is actually the easiest of these processes to revive, but also
quite labor and experience intensive.

BetterSense · Apr 20, 2015

I have good luck making 4x5 internegs (regardless of starting for format) onto black-and-white 4x5 film and making black and white prints. I can imagine color internegs may be difficult, but it's pretty easy with black and white.

allenying · Apr 20, 2015

what did you mean by reversal technique? you don't mean exposing the paper to light after starting the developing, do you?

wildbill · Apr 20, 2015

I'm not sure why you'd call kodak but all the info about their former line of products and current dismal line of products is available on the web.

allenying · Apr 20, 2015

reading on the web is not always as clear as talking to someone on the phone.

Photo Engineer · Apr 21, 2015

Internegatives and printing on RA paper or scanning and digitally printing are the only 2 ways to go that are "easy".

Harder is to make dye transfer, color carbon or color bromoil prints.

PE

DREW WILEY · Apr 21, 2015

Indeed. I once walked to the source of the Salmon River in Idaho where I could simply step across it without even jumping or getting my feet wet. By the time it runs into the Columbia, well ... I'd hate to risk the crossing even in a hang-glider. Color printing is like that. You have to
intelligently choose where to negotiate it.

rowghani · Apr 22, 2015

Hey Drew I thought dye transfer was obsolete as well. Can you still get the required material?

rowghani · Apr 22, 2015

Found this: http://dyetransfer.de/articles/265.html?site_language=EN

Apparently material is being made again for this process. Very cool.

Photo Engineer · Apr 22, 2015

Try Jim Browning's dye transfer web site for lots of information and examples.

PE

analog printing slides

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency