There is the way still.
Last batch of Ilfochrome paper and chemistry was produced specially for owners Moscow Gallery of Classic Photography at 2015 year. Expiration date is may/july 2016. They still sell paper on ebay, and, perhaps will sell you some chemistry kit. If not - ask PE, he knows how to develop it or simply search the forum.
Some of my photos in DIY chemistry at fresh paper. (flowers was spoiled during incorrect film developing)
It seems its unavailable for now, but it's possible, that the seller is just on a summer vacation. You also may try to google Moscow Classic gallery and write a letter for them. As far as I know they still do cibachrome printing.Hi! Well, I'm from Spain and here we're trying to buy Cibachrome chemicals... but we don't find anything! Could you tell me the ebay page you talked about? Thanks in advance!
PD: Beautiful work!
Totally agree. If you want a print, you have to shoot colour negative. Ektar is an amazing film if optically printed on ra4 paper! Find the paper you like best and give it a go! I like Kodak Endura premier Glossy (F)And finally, if you want prints... why not negatives?:
Yes, it's correct on both counts.As I remember, Printon was an opaque plastic coated with an AnscoColor emulsion. In those days, Kodak made a similar type color print when you sent slides to Kodak Processing for printing. Is my memory correct?......Regards!
Calling Cibachr a poor medium due to the ineptitude of some lab klutz is like calling a Porsche a lousy car because an aardvark can't drive it! I got magnificent prints with it. RA4 is a different medium, that's all. But for all practical purposes, Cibachr is extinct, so no sense arguing about this.
Yeah, I got so damn good at printing my Dad's old Kodachrome ASA 10 slides and 6x9 Fuji and Ektachrome. I took a few years away and came back to the horror. Never seen blacker blacks, super gloss, it looks liquid, like you can dive in. RA-4, especially a OPTICAL print from a MF negative is easier and really quite good. But it's different. One thing I have found is I get great gloss on RA-4 using a Ilford 1050 RC print drier, much higher gloss, literally (according to the experts) melt the gelatin a bit so it flows and levels like a baked paint finish. I still shoot some chrome, but Im no damn good with scanners, but 6x6 Fujichrome slides LOOK awesome projected.Thanks everyone. This is depressing as all get out. I've actually never printed from a color negative... In fact, the only color film I've ever done my own darkroom work on has been Velvia 50. So, barring doing internegatives, what are the full analog color neg alternatives that get closest? Most saturated, fine-grained negative color film? Most vivid, eye popping print paper/process?
I feel like I just found a forum full of kindred spirits.
God I hate the 21st century.
what do you mean by contrast mask? How do you do that?And some negatives might Ned a contrast-increase mask
what do you mean by contrast mask? How do you do that?
because ILFORD doesn't have a chemical division anymore, they only sell ink jet paper now and one of them it is called ilfochrome. Harman Technology doesn't own the ilfochrome brand, and probably they wouldn't have the equipment to produce that materialI wonder why no one's petitioning Ilford to bring back Ilfochrome the way they're petitioning Kodak about Kodachrome, Fuji about pack film, etc. This seems to come up a lot lately.
because ILFORD doesn't have a chemical division anymore, they only sell ink jet paper now and one of them it is called ilfochrome. Harman Technology doesn't own the ilfochrome brand, and probably they wouldn't have the equipment to produce that material
http://ilford.com/products/ilfochrome/platinum-super-gloss-metal
OK, that was me making assumptions given that the Harman DPP was a Marly product initially - that & the lack of a reversal step in the P-3 process. I'm probably missing something vital about how silver dye bleach enables pos-pos printing?Ilfochrome uses standard emulsions, not direct positive emulsions.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?