Making Commercial Color Separation Negatives of Transparencies for the Kodak Dye Transfer Process

[Carnie Bob]

I agree with Lachian and Koraks here, I would like to see practical examples from a worker making prints today.
I have seen some DT prints and they were lovely, but I do not know of anyone doing current work with the process.


I think the visual proof is important.. I make tri colour GB over Palladiums that can match monitor.. so when I want to get into a
discussion with someone about this process I would like to see their expertise level visually , not ripping text out of manuals and regurgitating.
I was interested in this thread because I do make daily colour separation negatives via PS to inkjet negs , and was quite intrigued to talk with someone currently making sep negs as well.

 

[warden]

My goal is to support interest in this type of process in the fine art industry. I don't have enough old stock Kodak matrix film and paper to do this commercially. This is only a very small part of my research into DT. Color separation methods are also of use to other processes.

The fact is Dye Transfer was probably one of, or possibly the most secretive color print process Kodak ever sold, excluding materials for classified military projects. This monopolization of DT by Kodak was anti-competitive with an end goal to stifle any non Kodak customer and make the market as small of possible. There is really no critical discussion about what was known by industry and how it was being used. It really is night and day between what industry did and what these publications claim. Those who had the knowledge to use this system well selfishly guarded the techniques they used, and rarely discussed them openly. The commercial success of Dye Transfer required information not generally known or obtainable through published sources.

Ok thanks for paragraph 1, which gives the context I was curious about. I’ve long been fascinated with dye transfer after seeing prints that were made that way. They just seem to have that last 2% of oomph that is marvelous to see.

As for paragraph 2, well you’re hearing from several highly experienced forum members that all that stuff is probably nonsense, and definitely tiring to read for the 30th time. But whatever, carry on!

 

[koraks]

I think "commercial success" is a difficult construct. I'm sure dye transfer prints can be made using the information that's available to the general public, if we add up everything published to date by parties in the heyday of the art as well as more recent publications from people like Ctein. Whether one can successfully sell those prints depends on many other factors in addition to how they're made exactly. Finally, given the number of dye transfer printers that have been around and the natural variability in people's temperament, surely, there have been (and maybe still are) printers who have been/were/still are perfectly happy to share everything they know, provided they have the time to answer the questions of the curious souls who set out to pick their brains. Or, simply put - it seems like it's a set of competencies too widely distributed to effectively keep a lid on it, anyway.

Of course, all that removes nothing from the fact that it's a complex skillset that takes both theoretical insight and countless hours of getting your hands dirty (and wet) in order to get anywhere at all. But isn't that the case with many of these processes?

 

[IB Photochemistry]

I agree with Lachian and Koraks here, I would like to see practical examples from a worker making prints today.
I have seen some DT prints and they were lovely, but I do not know of anyone doing current work with the process.

Bob, I am currently actually MAKING DYE TRANSFER PRINTS now, unlike Drew and Lachlan. I made some transfers last year and would like to make another in the next month or two. What kind of examples do you want to see? I have pictures of masks and separation negatives, curves, etc.

I think the visual proof is important.. I make tri colour GB over Palladiums that can match monitor.. so when I want to get into a
discussion with someone about this process I would like to see their expertise level visually , not ripping text out of manuals and regurgitating.
I was interested in this thread because I do make daily colour separation negatives via PS to inkjet negs , and was quite intrigued to talk with someone currently making sep negs as well.

I used all of the techniques I disclosed here. It wouldn't have worked out very well if I used only the methods from publications specifically on Dye Transfer. I did that originally more than 10 year ago and was it clear to me some key pieces of information was missing.

 

[IB Photochemistry]

As for paragraph 2, well you’re hearing from several highly experienced forum members that all that stuff is probably nonsense, and definitely tiring to read for the 30th time. But whatever, carry on!

These forum members saying this never worked in a commercial DT lab that I'm aware of. There are a few people on Photrio who I know of that have done this commercially, but haven't commented on this thread either way.

 

[warden]

These forum members saying this never worked in a commercial DT lab that I'm aware of. There are a few people on Photrio who I know of that have done this commercially, but haven't commented on this thread either way.

I’m happy to see in post 129 that you have been making DT prints! I for one would enjoy seeing some pictures of the prints and maybe a description of your working methods. That type of printing is a true rarity these days, and I’ll value learning from you even without seeing your resume or knowing your work history.

 

[koraks]

I’m happy to see in post 129 that you have been making DT prints! I for one would enjoy seeing some pictures of the prints and maybe a description of your working methods. That type of printing is a true rarity these days, and I’ll value learning from you even without seeing your resume or knowing your work history.

Seconded!!

 

[Carnie Bob]

Bob, I am currently actually MAKING DYE TRANSFER PRINTS now, unlike Drew and Lachlan. I made some transfers last year and would like to make another in the next month or two. What kind of examples do you want to see? I have pictures of masks and separation negatives, curves, etc.



I used all of the techniques I disclosed here. It wouldn't have worked out very well if I used only the methods from publications specifically on Dye Transfer. I did that originally more than 10 year ago and was it clear to me some key pieces of information was missing.

I take Iphone pictures all the time of my prints, I think that is what I am interested in, basically some background images making the prints would also be wonderful to see.

 

[Raghu Kuvempunagar]

I made some transfers last year and would like to make another in the next month or two. What kind of examples do you want to see?

I'm not Bob, but I would also be very interested in seeing pics of these prints if you can share them here or on DM. I appreciate your efforts to throw light on the technical side of this awe-inspiring process.

 

[DREW WILEY]

IB - Why should I be forced to repeat that you do not speak for me? Where did I - me, I myself - ever state that I hadn't made masks and separation negatives specifically for dye transfer purposes, or hadn't dyed and rolled out matrices? I never said that - you did - and it's both presumptuous to say that about me, and entirely incorrect.

What I did state is that I regard myself as a beginner at this, and probably don't have the time or income to perfect the process to anywhere near the same degree as I have done with Cibachrome and chromogenic color printing. I made numerous matched separation and masking sets prior to the pandemic. How do I know I'm on the right track with these? Because I made DT prints of color test targets (MacBeth Chart) taken on more than one kind of chrome sheet film, which came out well balanced and properly hue saturated as actual DT test samples. That's what I mean by "playing the piano chords". I could hypothetically start up again anytime, but don't have much incentive, since I already have more efficient ways to make world-class color prints.

As far as simplicity versus complexity goes : I know career DT printers who rarely masked at all, and relied almost entirely on dye pH adjustments, rolling tweaks, and selective bleaching to obtain excellent prints. With Pan Matrix Film in particular, a densitometer isn't even really needed, since there are no separations to begin with. It can all be done by eye.

But I've also seen a work routinely requiring 16 sheets of film per image - dual separations for each of the three colors - a high contrast version with its mask set, and a low-contrast equivalent with its own set sets (both sets used to expose the same respective sheet of matrix film - in order to cleanly span the whole contrast range); plus typically another mask or two. Result - it worked, but only garden-variety, and as grainy as hell. Have you ever researched that approach?

In other words, there are many ways to get the job done. DT printers tend to take their own paths, and maybe or maybe not write about it afterwards. Finding the right supplies today anymore is a far bigger problem. At least I've identified current films which do work quite well for both masking and tricolor separations.

Masking protocols are not mutually interchangeable between DT, carbon, Ciba, Chromogenic printing, B&W silver printing, etc. They all differ. Likewise, with tricolor separation strategy.

 

[IB Photochemistry]

I will soon post some examples of some Dye Transfer prints I rolled myself, some of my equipment used, and separation negatives, and masks.

 

[IB Photochemistry]

IB - Why should I be forced to repeat that you do not speak for me? Where did I - me, I myself - ever state that I hadn't made masks and separation negatives specifically for dye transfer purposes, or hadn't dyed and rolled out matrices? I never said that - you did - and it's both presumptuous to say that about me, and entirely incorrect.

I think what I said was you made at least one set of separations for DT but didn't make highlight masks. You then seemed to agree with me that you didn't make highlight masks, but that I was “twisting my [your] words”, then you went on about that you thought it wasn't necessary. I don't know if you made Principle masks or not since I don't know where on the site or if you said you did. You did imply that 3 sheet DT from transparencies could be fine, so I might have incorrectly interpreted that as such, that you didn't make principles masks. Again I don't know if you did or not. And yes I am aware you tried to rolling some matrices you made once. I haven't seen any pictures of them.

As far as simplicity versus complexity goes : I know career DT printers who rarely masked at all, and relied almost entirely on dye pH adjustments, rolling tweaks, and selective bleaching to obtain excellent prints. With Pan Matrix Film in particular, a densitometer isn't even really needed, since there are no separations to begin with. It can all be done by eye.

I disagree with this.

Pan matrix requires careful use of flash controls to correct color and spacial modulation, and a desitometer can be useful there. Pan matrix does have an automatic masking function that I have not fully investigated yet. Its a corrective mask for the Kodak printing dyes, not an isolation mask of imaging dyes. No publications exist of this function, but it is detailed in an archived collection of relevant materials.

But I've also seen a work routinely requiring 16 sheets of film per image - dual separations for each of the three colors - a high contrast version with its mask set, and a low-contrast equivalent with its own set sets (both sets used to expose the same respective sheet of matrix film - in order to cleanly span the whole contrast range); plus typically another mask or two. Result - it worked, but only garden-variety, and as grainy as hell. Have you ever researched that approach?

Yes, I am aware of “ganged” separations. I haven't researched it as much as some of the more basic approaches used in the industry. Basically one makes two sets of separation negatives, one too contrasty the other slightly flat, and two sets of principle masks and two sets of highlight masks. Then usually, with this approach two isolation filters are used, such as Wratten #29 and Wratten #25 with to different sets of separations, so therefore there would be 4 red separation negatives of both contrasts and dye sidebands contrasts.

In other words, there are many ways to get the job done. DT printers tend to take their own paths, and maybe or maybe not write about it afterwards. Finding the right supplies today anymore is a far bigger problem. At least I've identified current films which do work quite well for both masking and tricolor separations.

That is your opinion. I don't want to keep going over with you, why you think I'm wrong about the old materials. For the interest of historical accuracy the old materials need to be referenced. I have other information to add on this thread with respect to the making of commercial DT separation negatives.

 

[Lachlan Young]

I do make daily colour separation negatives via PS to inkjet negs

If you cut away all the irrelevant noise that has been generated on this thread, dye transfer's neg density requirements are essentially those of digital negs for silver gelatin. No great magic to it. It's a process of the 1930s/40s that ceased research in 1965.

The bigger issue is one of scaling the matrix emulsion for craft scale use/ manual blade coating tests, vis-a-vis more industrial making of it, or for that matter industrial scale coating of it (given that nobody seems to want to let go of their unused hoards of the Fotokemika batch).

 

[Raghu Kuvempunagar]

I will soon post some examples of some Dye Transfer prints I rolled myself, some of my equipment used, and separation negatives, and masks.

Thanks, this will be very useful. Will look forward.

 

[DREW WILEY]

There again you go, IB - don't pretend to know what I did or didn't do. Your assumptions are wrong. Of course I did highlight mask tests - but there's more than one way to skin a cat there too.

The last person who used Pan Matrix Film (and bought up so much that it required a second mortgage on his house), and did so for many years professionally, would significantly disagree with your description of its usage. No flashing was involved, just a basic enlarger - plus pin-registered easel of course. I've been in those digs; and it was a pretty darn simple setup.

Lachlan - high-end DIY slot coaters have been used to make private use prototyping matrix film in bulk. I doubt the blade technique would be appropriate.

 

[Lachlan Young]

Pan matrix requires careful use of flash controls to correct color and spacial modulation, and a desitometer can be useful there. Pan matrix does have an automatic masking function that I have not fully investigated yet. Its a corrective mask for the Kodak printing dyes, not an isolation mask of imaging dyes.

This sounds like a half-understood muddle between various extended techniques used when chromogenic printing on current higher contrast papers, and/ or trying to force a troublesome neg into dye transfer without really understanding either. A properly exposed (this is the key aspect here) colour neg is inherently masked for colour and contrast control (with limitations on misuse for maintaining sufficiently accurate colour - as you should know if you have done even the bare minimum of colour critical work with colour neg, for that matter, had to get misused CN film to produce a good print). Getting the density equalised sufficiently on an overexposed sky is not the matter at hand when discussing the baseline fundamentals of the process.

There were no great secrets in the Pan Matrix emulsion. Its lack of sophistication in terms of emulsion technology is what killed it. It was early 1950s in terms of emulsion fundamentals.

I also happen to know people who taught dye transfer (and other colour separators from elsewhere in graphic arts) at a further/ higher education level in the UK from the 1960s onwards as part of advanced colour printing techniques, and the clear opinion I have heard was to the effect of 'Pan Matrix was much easier to work with, compared to working from transparencies', not lots of lengthy claims about needing complex pre-flash etc.

high-end DIY slot coaters have been used to make private use prototyping matrix film in bulk. I doubt the blade technique would be appropriate.

That was not my point. A proper coating blade as discussed by Ron Mowrey is capable of delivering coatings of very high quality. The problem is emulsion scaling. The volumes involved in the open source JB emulsion are very much greater (and will by all accounts readily scale up to industrial scale) than you would want to make for initial coating experiments, but if you scale down (from 5L to 500ml, for example), you may run into non-linearity (Debye and Hückel). It's a (potentially wasteful) headache rather than a complete stoppage, and would be solved very readily were a company like Adox or Foma to make a batch of decent size and bottle it in 1L quantities. It would then be much more easily stored cold, then the portions needed for coating a given set (or sets) of matrices could be used, rather than having to rejig the emulsion to enable sub 1L makes (making a 5L batch is getting industrial, fast).