Oh.. Cibachr never was a reversal process, but a modernization of the "dye destruction" process invented in the 1930's. There are no dye couplers like in chronogenic prints. The final dyes are all to begin with, then after exposure and development, the unexpsed dye is removed with a strong acid "bleach" step. Hence the paper is dark to begin with and comes out with black borders, and requires a powerful exposing light.
Interesting. Do you have a perforator then?ultimate goal is to slit it and use it in an 8mm cinekodak camera.
I’m more concerned about the film development than the print process because I’ll be scanning them in. My ultimate ultimate goal is to slit it and use it in an 8mm cinekodak camera.
I'm working on creating a sort-of press, based around legos (at least for the main structure) and incorporating some metal for the hole punching part (undecided right now). A standard LEGO brick is just about 16mm wide (the width of double 8mm film and 16mm film.)Interesting. Do you have a perforator then?
IIRC, it was a very slow copying-type film, quoted at about 1 ASA equivalent. There's an old Data Sheet on http://www.tate.org.uk/download/file/fid/20949
Hey PE, I’ve searched a bunch and this thread was almost what I thought would help:There are several do-it-yourself formulas posted here.
PE
There was a post some time ago on another thread that the paper does not keep well even when frozen. Whether this was one person's experience or not I don't remember. If it is true then Ilfovhrome/Cibachrome is essentially dead.
Hi, so I’ve been scouring the web. I recently came upon some ilfochrome film, 35mm perfed, and I’ve been searching for a way to develop it. I sent out a few emails but haven’t heard back from the people who used to make P5 chemicals. So looking at this thread (and some others) all I see are people that are concerned about the actual print process, which makes me wonder is there something that everyone knows that I just don’t? Is there an alternative process for developing the film itself that everyone already knows about and doesn’t talk about?
I’m more concerned about the film development than the print process because I’ll be scanning them in. My ultimate ultimate goal is to slit it and use it in an 8mm cinekodak camera.
The most disturbingly depressing thing is that hipsters will be here for the next 1000 years.In a thousand years archaeologists will unearth, deep underground in a secret location, hundreds of boxes of Cibachrome print paper and rolls of Fujifilm Velvia 50, perfectly frozen, preserved, and shielded from radiation. They will have a field day trying to figure out what it all is, and how to use it!
And then they will make their first Cibachrome print. Their heads will explode from how natural it looks, them being so used to the latest 5000 megapixel2 holographic direct-to-brain images that they've never even seen a real piece of paper. And then they will program their replicator machines to produce this new medium in insane quantities. Jetpack-toting hipsters will turn out in droves to take badly overexposed images and print them on Cibachrome using filters to remove all but magenta tones, having cross-processed them in the reverse-engineered C-3767 color process (by Kodak of course, which by this time is still limping along in the form of "Comcast-WesternDigital-Kodak-Alaris" and styling themselves as a "forward-thinking progressive digital holographic dynamic imaging innovator").
And so history repeats itself.
I had my best results with Ektachrome , regular 120 Ektachrome, not warm,vivid ,warm vivid saturated etc.etc. I've never been a big fan of Velvia, Provia-F, now that's lovely slide film. I made some nice Cibachrome prints from some of my Dad's old pre-Kodachrome II slides as well. The gloss was so high you could not physically touch the image with ungloved hand without leaving permanent finger prints.Ha! The reason the archaeologists will find boxes of Ciba buried with rolls of Velvia is because that's the worst film choice to try to print on it. They buried it out of frustration. Somewhere nearby there's a buried pile of .90 density masks and frightful electrical bills.
Ha! The reason the archaeologists will find boxes of Ciba buried with rolls of Velvia is because that's the worst film choice to try to print on it. They buried it out of frustration. Somewhere nearby there's a buried pile of .90 density masks and frightful electrical bills.
On the contrary (very much), Velvia, Provia, Ektachrome and even Kodachrome printed beautifully to Ilfochrome Classic.
I printed Velvia almost exclusively, you just had to know how and when to expose it (and when not to bother!). Although if the ship hadn't sunk before I really had a chance to shoot much of it, I probably would have gravitated toward Astia eventually.
I've printed plenty of Velvia on Ciba, and done it very well. That's precisely why I have the confidence to call it the worst choice. Almost any other chrome film is more cooperative.
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?