Making a Dye Transfer Matrix film

What happened to dye matrix filn?

As long as the discussion is about ANALOG film, colors, etc then OK. BUT who give a rats behind about digital prints here? This is supposed to be a forum section about Emulsions and how to make and use them.

Hand Crafted Prints

jmcclure said:

As long as the discussion is about ANALOG film, colors, etc then OK. BUT who give a rats behind about digital prints here? This is supposed to be a forum section about Emulsions and how to make and use them.

Click to expand...

Good point! I for one and pretty bored by 'inkjet does everything' mentality these days. Calling them 'giclee' prints doesn't make it any better. The absolute pinnacle of bad taste is making an inkjet print and calling it a platinum print, because you used some set of inks some manufacturer brand named 'platinum'. Absurd! 4 color carbon, dye transfer, color gum printing, these are actually hand made works of art requiring craftmanship to produce. Mastering the the processes takes decades. While there are still many making 'analog' B&W prints, hand crafted color prints are becoming so rare most people will never see one. A pity.

JM, Jim;

I agree completely.

PE

Suggestions on how to make Pan Matrix Film - or a Panchromatic emulsion

I can only make suggestions here for this, but I can make a pretty fair guess as to how you can do it from Jim's basic formula above.

This will allow you to make Dye Transfer prints from color negatives.

First, split the formula into 3 parts after you do the sensitization with hypo in the original formula. One part label BLUE and put this away.

Take one of the remaining parts and sensitize with a green sensitizing dye. I suggest a dye like SDE8006 or SDA9204 from H. W. Sands. Label this can of emulsion GREEN. The raw emulsion should be magenta in color.

Take the remainder and sensitize with a dye such as SDA3057. Note: This dye is normally a green sensitizer, but in the presence of iodide undergoes "J" aggregation and forms a red sensitizer. If you get only green sensitivity, add a small amount of KI to the emulsion and hold for 15' before adding the dye. I suggest about 0.3% (mole % of KI / mole of silver). The raw emulsion should be cyan in color, not magenta. If it is magenta, the "J" aggregate has not formed.

The dyes should be used at about 100 mg/mole / mole of silver.

When done spectrally sensitizing these emulsions, mixing them 1:1:1 will give a pan sensitive matrix film emulsion which then must be treated using the rest of Jim's formula HOWEVER, use a black dye in place of the Tartrazine that he uses. The pan film must use a black dye at about the same concentration.

Of course, you can coat 3 different films making a Red, Green and Blue film set, but this is not advised due to the possibility of curve shape problems between the emulsion types.

These dyes are available at the rate of about $100 / gram. They are used commercially in photographic products by major manufacturers and so I know that they are good and work just fine.

I don't use them due to expense and difficulty coating in total darkness, as well as the fact that the green dye is much too long and broad for any real camera work. It should work in this application.

Remember, this is a suggested starting point. I did each of the above, but did not go on to mix them, as the coating of pan materials was just out of my reach and not a current objective of my work.

As a side note, this is one way to make a pan sensitive film for camera use. Jim's emulsion is usable in this fashion if you harden the coating rather than leave it unhardened.

PE

"flying rat's a**hole"

jmcclure said:

As long as the discussion is about ANALOG film, colors, etc then OK. BUT who give a rats behind about digital prints here? This is supposed to be a forum section about Emulsions and how to make and use them.

Click to expand...

i believe that my title is the correct american vernacular?

i basically agree with you EXCEPT that such prints are the output for sale by many socalled 'authorities' in both gel and 'alt' process photog who have been flaming all and sundry is this thread and in others on this forum

i differ from pe in his assesment of the epson ultrachrome products-i use them he doesn't

as output i don't think that inkjet printers should be excluded since they are in fact what in the printing trade are properly called "duplicators" since they use halftoning but don't have pressure or form rollers-the "press" part of "printing press" is litteral: a sheet fed or web "press" actually has a delicatly adjustable pressure mechanism-that is the most important final control of the out put

by your logic injet printers would be excluded from all 'photography'

where does that leave all the heavy hitters here who make $ from the prints that they sell?

what about all the alt photo printers who create the enlarged negs on inkjets EXCLUSIVELY???????

so sorry-should say "FLAMING FLYING RAT'S A**HOLE"

vaya con dios

Z;

You are right. I don't use EPSON, I use a Canon 9900i when I need a digital print. I was unhappy with the surface, dye hue and metamerism of the EPSON prints.

I'm referring you to the URL I posted above. They corroborate my observations. EPSON pigments only work because they are mixed with dyes (which fade, of course).

You can make some very nice prints using an EPSON, but I didn't like them as much as the side by side comparison with the Canon.

Since I use my digigal equipment for family snap shots or for doing non-professional work, I am not in your league for use though.

IDK what I would use if I were still at EK, but I probably would have stayed in the analog (film) division.

I don't agree that digital printers should be included in this thread and that is why I started a separate thread on image stability. I might also start one on color reproduction, but I have insufficient data on inkjet and pigment inks to do so.

PE

z-man

My comments only had to due with this thread which was about matrix film. The discussion about digital prints and ink stability is suitable in another thread, and indeed one has been started. I was sorry to see the thread seemed to be reverting the deleted flame war so I made my post. I do use digital equipment and printing as well as analog so I understand the interest but sometime the passions of posters can obscure the subject- mainly matrix film in this case.

The discussion of ink and colorant stability is a very important one that is not covered by any discussions near enough.

I will say that I was suprised and disapointed when the section on hybrid photography was banished. I am very interested in digital negatives for both alternate and silver prints.

Photo Engineer said:

Z;

You are right. I don't use EPSON, I use a Canon 9900i when I need a digital print. I was unhappy with the surface, dye hue and metamerism of the EPSON prints.

I'm referring you to the URL I posted above. They corroborate my observations. EPSON pigments only work because they are mixed with dyes (which fade, of course).

You can make some very nice prints using an EPSON, but I didn't like them as much as the side by side comparison with the Canon.

Since I use my digigal equipment for family snap shots or for doing non-professional work, I am not in your league for use though.

IDK what I would use if I were still at EK, but I probably would have stayed in the analog (film) division.

I don't agree that digital printers should be included in this thread and that is why I started a separate thread on image stability. I might also start one on color reproduction, but I have insufficient data on inkjet and pigment inks to do so.

PE

Click to expand...

so lets agree to disagree-but what would you need to get a color repro discusion going?

vaya con dios

Outstanding! Pan Matrix film

Photo Engineer said:

I can only make suggestions here for this, but I can make a pretty fair guess as to how you can do it from Jim's basic formula above.PE

Click to expand...

Thanks for the info, Ron. Outstanding. I'm going to post this at the dyetransfer site on Yahoo. Maybe someone will actually make some pan matrix film - Ctein would love it!

REgards - Jim Browning

jmcclure said:

z-man

My comments only had to due with this thread which was about matrix film. The discussion about digital prints and ink stability is suitable in another thread, and indeed one has been started. I was sorry to see the thread seemed to be reverting the deleted flame war so I made my post. I do use digital equipment and printing as well as analog so I understand the interest but sometime the passions of posters can obscure the subject- mainly matrix film in this case.

The discussion of ink and colorant stability is a very important one that is not covered by any discussions near enough.

I will say that I was suprised and disapointed when the section on hybrid photography was banished. I am very interested in digital negatives for both alternate and silver prints.

Click to expand...

understood

i assume that pe's next to last post has put this thread back on track as you see it

i feel that dt is a hand made 3/c method that is a defacto production and publishing process-that is why i made the comments --

that it is -imo-the only hand photo process besides carbon and gum that can allow an artist full control of the finished print and still provide a print that has some hope of being hung on the wall and not selfdestructing in short time does not change my own classification of the process

it is gelatine based so it in this particular venue-but it is still more closely related to a multi color wood cut than a cibachrome

agreement to a disagreement?


vaya con dios

jmcclure said:

I will say that I was suprised and disapointed when the section on hybrid photography was banished. I am very interested in digital negatives for both alternate and silver prints.

Click to expand...

Jim:

Come on over to Hybrid! We're trying to establish alternative process threads over there. It is a paradox to be sure, but needs to acknowledged nevertheless, that digital negatives are the salvation of film photography. It will be a long time before digital cameras (at least those that are even remotely affordable) will equal MF or LF film. Digital negs from scanned film still can't be beat. Photographers who recognize this are among the most vocal about the preservation of film.

I research silver gelatin emulsions. This would be impossible for one person, in the current climate of analog materials loss, without digital negatives to standardize the research process. This is true for most of the serious alternative process workers. Because I actually respect Sean's right to ban hybrids and because my mother raised an honest child, I don't post my work on APUG. I invite you and other honest folks to post their work, or at least feel free to post questions and comments on http://www.hybridphoto.com/forums/

Sincerely,
Denise Ross

Someone on another forum has referenced my post above regarding making a panchromatic matrix film (Pan Matrix Film).

I have some comments. I guess this inidividual does not want to discuss it, but rather prefers to comment elsewhere.

1. You don't need a degree in nuclear physics or physical chemistry to do this work. Kodacrhome film was invented by two musicians (Mannes and Godowsky), and I am an organic chemist that was made into a photo engineer. So, it can be done with determination and the willingness to experiment.

2. Sensitizing dyes such as I listed tend to behave in a rather similar manner on a single emulsion. All dyes tend to reduce blue speed, but they also reduce contrast. Since these changes will be quite similar, the use of a blue sensitizing dye will even out any curve shape / contrast changes that might take place. You should have little problem with curve shape.

3. Pan Matrix Film produced a normal dmin and dmax. If it contained a carbon dispersion, then the carbon would remain in the coating, trapped in the gelatin relief image and it would cause untold problems. So, it contained a black dye that was sold in liquid concentrate at one time by Kodak. I have a bottle.

4. Melenex support does not absorb dye to any significant degree, nor does it distort the dmin thereby or have any other effect on dye transfer imaging.

5. Electron Bombardmant similar to what Chester Carlson invented (Xerox) is used to 'sub' estar and allow the emulsion to stick. It fades over a 24 hour period but can be used during this time as a method of promoting adhesion. This method is so difficult, I doubt if anyone can reduce it to practice in a home darkroom.

6. Patents on photographic materials can be very very misleading. All patents assume that 'one is skilled in the art' of photographic engineering and therefore making comments on a patent is like trying to describe a half done picture puzzle. The missing pieces are trade secrets that do not have to be disclosed. Sorry guys but there it is!

7. Anyone yakking about how this is better than that, or they know better, had best put up or shut up and show some prints or negatives that uses their knowledge to produce an emulsion, a B&W print or a dye transfer. Otherwise their advice is smoke and mirrors. Jim's method works. I have seen the results.

PE

"Photo Engineer"'s Remarks

Ron Mowery has decided to attack me on this forum from a post I made to the yahoo Dyetransfer newsgroup. I no longer try to argue with Mowery because I prefer to work with experts in the filed of emulsion technology. My post was simply a reply to a post on the dyetransfer newsgroup; it doesn't concern this group so I did not prefer to "comment elsewhere". My comments on the Melinex 583 polyester film base were referenced to the dye transfer group because it is a concern for dye transfer printers. Most dye transfer printers are not on this forum anyway. Melinex 583 polyester does have a dye stain problem that was determined experimentally for the most part. As I stated on the DT newsgroup this becomes more of a problem if one doesn’t use highlight reducer regularly. This just makes the film more difficult to use than the old Kodak film and produces poorer results among many problems this film has.

If Ron ever looked at his old pan matrices he made he will find they have a blue-black cast to them. This blue color results from a pigment dispersion within the gelatin itself. Earlier matrix films DID IN FACT CONTAIN CARBON. Experts in matrix technology have told me exactly the same thing. If Kodak Pan Matrix film 4149 really has an anionic black dye, the same kind that was also used as the Kodak retouching dye, the dye will bleed out if the film was placed in water. The gelatin in the film becomes acidic at pH levels above its isoelectric point and the anionic dye washes out. If one places Kodak pan matrix film in water there is no dye bleeding out of it that is visible. One could certainly use a black dye that is compatible with the emulsion. Dyes like CI Direct Black 38 and CI Acid Black 1 may work but they would need to be tested. We know that Carbon works so anyone interested in doing this should start with this material first.

If one wants to produce modern emulsions an understanding of solid-state physics and materials science would be necessary. The pictorial film emulsions that Ron claims to have made only produce a maximum speed of about 25 ISO (probably lower). He may have claimed on some Internet forum that he was getting a speed of 200 ISO. Although that does sound impressive the experiment was not replicable. Before you start posting anything you should have some repeatability. Anything done in scientific research requires that the experiment be repeatable. Ron finds truth from highly amateurish experiments done by unqualified individuals and claims to understand how they work from them. He infers facts about physical and chemical properties from these sloppy amateurish experiments that are poorly documented, poorly tested and poorly researched.

I do read some of these Internet posts and interviews that Ron has made and find them extremely destructive towards efforts to produce new materials, improve existing materials and the market of silver halide materials. He lies, suppresses new and constructive ideas and misrepresents the market and potential market for AgX materials in an attempt to prove to others that the market for these is incredibly small and insignificant and that all the online efforts will be useless to promote or produce new materials. This comes from all Ron’s beliefs of course. The AgX market is effected by the Internet in way that could lead to a stable future for these materials.

I never consult with Ron Mowery and urge others to do the same if they want good results with their project(s). To coat a panchromatic matrix film you will need a real coating machine (the kind used for testing emulsions or making small run coatings) and a corona discharge machine to properly sub the emulsion to the 7 mil Cellulose Triacetate film. The kind of coating machine that Jim Browning used although useful, produces very large coating thickness irregularities, and is not very preferable for testing any kind of matrix film emulsions with.

Okay, folks--There are interesting questions here about making dye transfer materials, which are very interesting to some members of APUG, but please cut the ad hominem rhetoric. It is quite possible to question or refute someone's claims without name calling.

I have seen Jim Brownings matrices in person and they have no apparent stain. All dye transfers, in my experience, used some degree of highlight reducer, but this was used mainly to sharpen the various toes to make the curves align if they were incorrect. I have seen prints made using his hand coated film and they are beautiful. He was very generous and gave me 3 of them for which I thank him. I personally ran the coating machine under Jim's supervision and we prepared a very nice film coating and a paper coating.

I work regularly with a group of former photo engineers and am one myself. What else can I say about that. Those that can, do! Those that cannot...................???

Regarding pan matrix, a raw sheet of pan matrix film is densely black. The material washes out of the matrix during processing, but a tiny amount remains. I have seen this with the black dye I have. Carbon would not wash out well at all, and AFAIK was not used in Pan Matrix when I worked with it. In addition, carbon black contains oils which render coating very difficult. The carbon would have to be very highly purified at great expense. I am not aware of Kodak using carbon for anything but Rem Jet. I am willing to check it out though to get more information.

I made an ISO 25 - 80 speed film verified by 4 workshops, where the students also made it. That emulsion coated on paper has demonstrated an ISO of 100 - 200 due to the back reflection of the white paper support. This would be clear to anyone who read what I wrote and understood simple principles of photographic engineering (IE. the speed gain from coating an emulsion on reflective support). Our own David Goldfarb participated in one workshop session.

Modern emulsions were made at Kodak by technicians with Associate Degrees and they did very fine jobs at it. It is not rocket science, but rather having the proper equipment for the job at hand, and knowing the prior art within the company. Anyone reading the patents alone would have to be "skilled in the art" before they were able to do a credible job. Therefore a Fuji researcher would understand a Kodak patent and vice versa, but an outsider would probably be totally lost due to the prior art needed for understanding and the lack of knowledge of internal trade secrets.

I could ask a techician to make me a double run 5% iodide emulsion, core shell t-grain, ask them to get the optimal chemical sensitization and then work out the optimum green sensitization and they could do it. These guys were great but they had the internal 'culture' to fall back on. Outside of that 'culture' everything must be explained step by step before a resonable result can be obtained. That knowledge base and 'culture' existed at every photographic company. I am attempting to pass it on, but there seems to be a lot of opposition to it by self proclaimed experts.

I say let them post some of their hand coated results.

PE

Correction

I have researched the dyes used in Matrix and Pan Matrix films.

In the Matrix instructions it says that the film contains a dye that washes out during processing.

In the Pan Matrix instructions it says that the film contains a pigment. There is no note regarding washing out or not washing out. The photos I have of sheets of unprocessed Pan Matrix film show it as being totally black and opaque. Matrix film is yellow and translucent.

In addition, the Flexichrome process includes instructions for using a black modeling dye, and the film contained a dye which washed out during processing like the matrix films above. So this film was yellow before processing and had a black image when being used. I suppose this confused me.

However, there is no clear indication about what Pan Matrix contained, but I would assume it contained a black pigment which may have been purified carbon, but might have been otherwise. Flexichrome used a black dye, and Kodak used black dyes for acutance dyes (grey in appearance due to concentration in panchromatic films). They never used carbon in any film due to the difficulty in washing it out. Therefore, if used in Pan Matrix film, the matrices probably would be nearly opaque after processing.

I would have to say that carbon could have been used but would remain behind imagewise in the coating after processing. This would make judging the image very very difficult.

I will look into this more.

PE

Final answer

From another Kodak engineer....

Pan Matrix film used a dye in a manner similar to Matrix film as far as they can remember.

PE

To mgarelick....

Your comments regarding Ron Mowrey's work are interesting. I presume from your level of implied expertise that you are an emulsion chemist, and have done quite a bit of work in emulsion design and coating, and therefore have many examples to back up your assertions that Ron Mowrey has led us all down the garden path.

What exactly is your experience with emulsion chemistry? Do you now, or did you work in a research capacity of some sort for a film manufacturer?

Can you please post some examples of your work, with details as to emulsion composition, preparation and more importantly, some pictures of the corona discharge equipment you have used to sub film base with?

I will go so far as to say that I believe the entire forum group is very interested in the work you have done, and would like to see your results.

Thanks,

Bob M.

Bob,

I am not an emulsion chemist but part of my academic background is in chemistry and physics, so I can argue with some of the comments Ron Mowery has posted. I am still doing extensive research into the dye imbibition transfer process and have uncovered many papers published in peer reviewed scientific publications that disprove most of what Ron presently believes. You cannot present to Ron numerous peer reviewed papers and expect him to change the BS he continually believes and posts. It’s nearly impossible, as I have tried it. For example, there are serious gaps in Ron’s knowledge of gelatin chemistry. And I really don’t believe that Ron knows that silver halides are actually a form of a semiconductor. In addition to not having extensive knowledge in materials sciences Ron is simply misrepresenting his past at EK. The people that actually design emulsions normally have Ph.D degrees in chemistry, materials sciences, chemical engineering and physics. Nearly all of the papers published in peer reviewed scientific publications by Eastman Kodak scientists normally have at least an MS degree. It is absolute total nonsense that EK was hiring people with Associate degrees to design emulsions. Those people like Ron are technicians, engineering aids, etc.

I have managed to track down some experts in emulsion technology. These people know matrix technology very well. Ron can make all kinds of conclusions about matrix film that it is a simple unhardened film loaded with a bunch of acutance dye, but that is far from the truth. The film Jim Browning has made is simple and very old technology. With a large amount of experimentation he managed to get it to work ok for him.

I don’t have access to a coating machine or the corona discharge machine at this time. There is someone that has a professional emulsion coating machine that can be used to make small run production coatings with that I may be interested in using if there isn’t any improvements in the matrix films available soon.

The only work I have done is synthesizing disazo and testing imbibition dyes. I have done this successfully and intend to share my findings with the dyetransfer group.

mgarelick said:

Bob,

misrepresenting his past at EK. The people that actually design emulsions normally have Ph.D degrees in chemistry, materials sciences, chemical engineering and physics. Nearly all of the papers published in peer reviewed scientific publications by Eastman Kodak scientists normally have at least an MS degree. It is absolute total nonsense that EK was hiring people with Associate degrees to design emulsions. Those people like Ron are technicians, engineering aids, etc.

Click to expand...

Boy, you scientist types sure can get Nasty! Do they teach that in your PhD program? I think I would rather go to art school.

- Jim

Michael;

I have a graduate degree in chemisty with thesis. My major was organic chemistry with a minor in biochemistry and my undergraduate degree was in chemistry with a minor in math.

Many of the techicians making emulions at Kodak had AAS degrees, and some of them were so good that they were promoted to professional status having learned so much on the job that they were treated as if they had graduate degrees. More power to them.

One assistant division director and highly regarded professional had only a high school education, and started as a glassware washer eventually ending up as a very astute photo engineer designing color films and finally becoming an assistant director. He held many Kodak patents.

And, remember Mannes and Godowsky? They had no formal scientific training whatsoever, but went on to design Kodachrome film in their own home before coming to Kodak and becoming full fledged engineers in spite of no formal scientific training. You seem to ignore these facts.

Talent and capability reside within the individual, as does the final result - creativity.

At the time I retired, there were several major emulsion makers at EK who had BS or AAS degrees. So, sorry to have to contradict you but you know less than nothing about what goes on inside Kodak.

I did quite a bit on gelatin - hardening research and the substitution of polymers for gelatin as well as on polymeric couplers. If you wish, you can see them in some of the Research Disclosures and Defensive Publications made by EK with my name on them. I have 15 patents, but many more publications in the RD and DP field.

So, I must disagree with your comments on my misrepresenting my past. In fact, I consider it a slur on my honesty and request that you stop this type of attack.

Furthermore, I have seen a corona discharge unit at EK, and have used it for in line work and with stored support. I have seen the design of the coating machine used for ILEB (In Line Electron Bombardment) and have used it in my own coatings. It was used on Estar and RC support both.

I can show my current work and point to what I have done in the past. It appears that in answering Bob, you can show nothing in return.

I got my information on Pan Matrix film from one of the former product engineers.

PE

I'd like to keep this thread open, because there is some real interest in this topic and there are people here capable of shedding some light on it, but once again, I'm asking all to dial back the rhetoric.

If you're questioning someone's credentials, have evidence in hand.

If you want to challenge someone's methods, references and citations will help those who are reading this thread sort out what's what, when they are ready to start coating.

The purpose of this forum is to share what we know and help others who are involved in these processes. It might be old technology or new technology, and there are legitimate interests in old technology here. Some people are interested in manufacturing very sophisticated materials with access to industrial equipment, and some people want to know what can be done in a home darkroom, and there is room for both and everyone in between, so please refrain from denigrating someone else's project, because it's not on the same scale as yours or doesn't have the same goals.

Thanks David for an excellent comment.

Re: comments posted by MG, I was not a technician, nor an engineering aid. I was a professional and member of the Kodak Research Senior Staff and a member of middle management. I was a group leader in the Emulsion Process Division.

I ask Michael to give his references as to where he found the 'data' on my position as he stated it, and in addition ask Michael to give his qualifications for posting his comments.

I do know about hole trapping and the other characteristics of emulsions as well as the theories behind sulfur and sulfur + gold sensitization, as well as dye sensitization. I find it would probably be counter productive to discuss it on a forum such as this as people don't need that information in order to make an emulsion or even in doing some original research. In fact, it would probably scare them away.

Remember KISS!

PE

I never said that people without any academic training could not formulate emulsions; it just isn’t preferable from the people I have spoken with. I have found that the people that coat emulsions (in the factory) at EK usually didn’t know how the emulsion was supposed to work but the people designing them did.

You begged the issues that I raised.

I asked you to answer to the statement you made about my qualifications and education and also your corresponding qualifications.

As for what level of education being preferable, I have seen many less educated people make better intuitive jumps and formulate good coatings or emulsions than a PhD.

PE