masking tutorial

[Erik L]

Hi folks,
Does anyone know of an online tutorial for making masks for use in cibachrome printing. I've seen sites where people want to sell a pin registration kit, but no sites explaining the ins and outs. I've tried the search function here and my keywords end up with hundreds of threads dealing with the word mask or contrast which aren't relative to what I am looking for. I'm sure it's here, but I can't find it. Any help would be greatly appreciated!
Regards
Erik

 

[Pupfish]

I'll have to search my bookmarks on a couple of retired computers to see if I can point you to some still-active links...

Meanwhile, you may not need a registration system if shooting in the larger formats as they can be aligned visually and taped down "good enough". For 35mm and MF you'd perhaps find that unsatisfactory if doing more than a very few. I built my own system after I discovered that the tried-and-true Condit registration system was no longer being made and very rarely became available used (and was going for about a grand when one could be found). But then again, making a register punch and contacting frame and easel pin set was made easier as I have a machine shop at my disposal. There are myriad ways to pin-register the larger formats with hole punches and tape-down pins etc, but not so easily with the miniature ones.

Another hurdle to overcome with masks is that ideally you'd want to use Pan Masking film, which being panchromatic B&W film is sensitive to the whole visible spectrum. It also doesn't have an anti-halation backing so the edges are naturally more diffuse. Unfortunately it too was discontinued about a dozen years ago. (Good luck finding any now, but it's what I've always used. I found exactly one box ten years ago, in 4x5 sheets that I had to cut down to 35mm sized chips in the dark-- remember, being panchromatic you can't work under a safelight.)

Some moved on to FP4 for masking but since then this emulsion too may have been axed. There was an issue of purple staining and color crossover in the highlights when masking with FP4 so I never bothered with it. Other emulsions might be tried but the greater accutance bumping up the granularity can be a problem when there's an antihalation backing.

For optimal results you'll also want some Ortho film to mask the specular highlights out of the contrast control mask so that the image retains bright highlights. This was once common for lithographic work but may be harder to source now.

Reciprocity failure characteristic of Ilfochrome would also rear it's head in exposures over 60 seconds when making 11x14s and 16x20s from 35mm... paper exposures often running from 8-45 minutes with attendant color crosses and shifts and dust settling on the paper or the mask, or slide during the exposure. There's 4 film surfaces to clean and to keep dust free with a mask. Spotting materials for Ilfochrome don't work so hot because dust is black and you've gotta scratch to the base to use them... Add to that burning up enlarger bulbs and having them shift color on a regular basis and you might begin to understand why contrast masking quickly becomes something of a chore.

While it may yet be possible to overcome all this you've got your work cut out for you in simply acquiring that materials nowadays. Nevertheless, you may decide to go for it anyhow. Just realize before you do that compared to all this it's relatively trivial nowadays to scan a slide and make a series of USM layers in Photoshop, and to vary the opacity of them individually or simply locally erase with the History Brush until the desired effect is achieved. I probably haven't made a mask in the past 5 years for the above reason. There's an art to making masks and printing through them and doing it well-- so that the final image doesn't look like a horrible HDR merge. It's possible to do this in Photoshop too, but at least you're not wasting materials rare as hen's teeth with each scrapped iteration.

Another thought: a score of years ago, a company called Photo-Tools, I believe, made or marketed a reuseable photochromic A/N glass mask called a Minit Mask. Idea was you contacted it with the slide in the carrier (there was even an optically-ground relief bulge in the 35mm size that held the glass in contact with the film emulsion) and then popped it with flash right before making a print exposure. Supposedly it held a latent reversed mask image for a few minutes. It was cleared with a heat gun or hair dryer. It's also long since out of production, but if you found one of these (and providing it still worked as intended) you might save yourself a great deal of grief and avoid the need for the lower density masks, at least.

That all said, I once figured that about 25% of my best portfolio shots were printable on Ilfochrome only with a contrast-controlling mask. Another 25% of my images still were a huge challenge on Ilfochrome and therefore better candidates for internegs and C-41 prints (even using the low-contrast CPM1M and the lowest contrast resin Ilfochrome material, the designation of which escapes me at the moment).

 

[Erik L]

Thanks Pupfish for the detailed response! I guess I didn't know what I was getting into. I recently began playing with Ilfochrome using the cpm1m as well with what I thought were relatively lower contrast scenes on velvia 4x5 and 8x10 chromes and I still get some blocked up shadows that have detail on the light box but not on the print. Maybe my paper isn't up to the task of these chromes. I've never tried masking and thought I would give it a try until you burst my happy bubble with what is involved I can't imagine what the standard contrast paper would do with my slides It's all new to me and has me looking for a few unanswered questions as to what is possible and not with the materials. The results are stunning to my eyes so far, minus a blocked shadow or highlight.
thanks again
Erik

 

[michaelbsc]

I'll have to search my bookmarks on a couple of retired computers to see if I can point you to some still-active links...

Please do. I'm interested, too.

While it may yet be possible to overcome all this you've got your work cut out for you in simply acquiring that materials nowadays. Nevertheless, you may decide to go for it anyhow. Just realize before you do that compared to all this it's relatively trivial nowadays to scan a slide and make a series of USM layers in Photoshop, and to vary the opacity of them individually or simply locally erase with the History Brush until the desired effect is achieved.
...

I probably haven't made a mask in the past 5 years for the above reason. There's an art to making masks and printing through them and doing it well-- so that the final image doesn't look like a horrible HDR merge. It's possible to do this in Photoshop too, but at least you're not wasting materials rare as hen's teeth with each scrapped iteration.

You take the fun out it that way. Even though I didn't start this thread, I'm latched in.

MB

 

[Pupfish]

Here's a couple of links that still work:
http://hv.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=005GQw
http://photo.net/medium-format-photography-forum/001XTh

 

[boyooso]

don't give up

Ilfochrome is unmatched in beauty, really!! It can be difficult though. I you want a print forever, it is best you print it with ciba!

There is a book "PROFESSIONAL APPROACH TO CIBACHROME" by BOB PACE

This would be the difinitive guide to contrast masking. It is difficult to find though. I have a copy if you want to borrow it and PROMISE to return it I would be willing....

Corey

I'll have to search my bookmarks on a couple of retired computers to see if I can point you to some still-active links...

Meanwhile, you may not need a registration system if shooting in the larger formats as they can be aligned visually and taped down "good enough". For 35mm and MF you'd perhaps find that unsatisfactory if doing more than a very few. I built my own system after I discovered that the tried-and-true Condit registration system was no longer being made and very rarely became available used (and was going for about a grand when one could be found). But then again, making a register punch and contacting frame and easel pin set was made easier as I have a machine shop at my disposal. There are myriad ways to pin-register the larger formats with hole punches and tape-down pins etc, but not so easily with the miniature ones.

Another hurdle to overcome with masks is that ideally you'd want to use Pan Masking film, which being panchromatic B&W film is sensitive to the whole visible spectrum. It also doesn't have an anti-halation backing so the edges are naturally more diffuse. Unfortunately it too was discontinued about a dozen years ago. (Good luck finding any now, but it's what I've always used. I found exactly one box ten years ago, in 4x5 sheets that I had to cut down to 35mm sized chips in the dark-- remember, being panchromatic you can't work under a safelight.)

Some moved on to FP4 for masking but since then this emulsion too may have been axed. There was an issue of purple staining and color crossover in the highlights when masking with FP4 so I never bothered with it. Other emulsions might be tried but the greater accutance bumping up the granularity can be a problem when there's an antihalation backing.

For optimal results you'll also want some Ortho film to mask the specular highlights out of the contrast control mask so that the image retains bright highlights. This was once common for lithographic work but may be harder to source now.

Reciprocity failure characteristic of Ilfochrome would also rear it's head in exposures over 60 seconds when making 11x14s and 16x20s from 35mm... paper exposures often running from 8-45 minutes with attendant color crosses and shifts and dust settling on the paper or the mask, or slide during the exposure. There's 4 film surfaces to clean and to keep dust free with a mask. Spotting materials for Ilfochrome don't work so hot because dust is black and you've gotta scratch to the base to use them... Add to that burning up enlarger bulbs and having them shift color on a regular basis and you might begin to understand why contrast masking quickly becomes something of a chore.

While it may yet be possible to overcome all this you've got your work cut out for you in simply acquiring that materials nowadays. Nevertheless, you may decide to go for it anyhow. Just realize before you do that compared to all this it's relatively trivial nowadays to scan a slide and make a series of USM layers in Photoshop, and to vary the opacity of them individually or simply locally erase with the History Brush until the desired effect is achieved. I probably haven't made a mask in the past 5 years for the above reason. There's an art to making masks and printing through them and doing it well-- so that the final image doesn't look like a horrible HDR merge. It's possible to do this in Photoshop too, but at least you're not wasting materials rare as hen's teeth with each scrapped iteration.

Another thought: a score of years ago, a company called Photo-Tools, I believe, made or marketed a reuseable photochromic A/N glass mask called a Minit Mask. Idea was you contacted it with the slide in the carrier (there was even an optically-ground relief bulge in the 35mm size that held the glass in contact with the film emulsion) and then popped it with flash right before making a print exposure. Supposedly it held a latent reversed mask image for a few minutes. It was cleared with a heat gun or hair dryer. It's also long since out of production, but if you found one of these (and providing it still worked as intended) you might save yourself a great deal of grief and avoid the need for the lower density masks, at least.

That all said, I once figured that about 25% of my best portfolio shots were printable on Ilfochrome only with a contrast-controlling mask. Another 25% of my images still were a huge challenge on Ilfochrome and therefore better candidates for internegs and C-41 prints (even using the low-contrast CPM1M and the lowest contrast resin Ilfochrome material, the designation of which escapes me at the moment).

 

[Claire Senft]

I concur with the remarks by boyooso relative to Bob Paces work. I do not have his Cibachrome book. I do have his book on masking for photographic purposes. I would also be willing to share. He has a lot of info on Ciba printing in it as well as dye transfer and B&W printing.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Kodak had 2 books on masking in their technical publication series. One is for color and highlight masking for Dye Transfer and color printing and the other is for Graphic Arts. Both books may still be available. They also have over 100 items on masking on their web site, many of which might apply to your application.

PE

 

[michaelbsc]

I concur with the remarks by boyooso relative to Bob Paces work. I do not have his Cibachrome book. I do have his book on masking for photographic purposes. I would also be willing to share. He has a lot of info on Ciba printing in it as well as dye transfer and B&W printing.

Can you post the ISBN so we can see if it's available somewhere, perhaps used from the Amazon associates. I've found several old things that way.

MB

 

[MarkL]

For masking systems check out Lynn Radeka's site, http://radekaphotography.com. He sells anti newton masking carriers that double as the mask-making contact holder. Masks are normally made on litho film which is cheap and readily available from Freestyle. You develop it in diluted dektol. The beauty is that a registration strip is merely taped to the edge of your film so it never affects your original. The mask(s) can be stored separately and at anytime in the future you just slap your film into the carrier, sandwiched with your mask and they're instantly perfectly aligned. With a little practice you can make a mask in very little time and it's easy to tweak them for your particular image.

Lynn provides detailed instructions on making a variety of contrast masks and he's very helpful with personalized advice. Although mostly black and white, check out the before/after examples on his website.

 

[Erik L]

Many thanks everyone! I will study up and get my hands dirty trying it out. Great resource here. Again thanks
Erik

 

[Claire Senft]

michaelbsc, Mr Pace self published his books. There is no ISB available. I would guess that Mr. Pace still has copies for sale. The price on the Ciba book was as I recall $100 for the masking for photographic purposes is was $46..

 

[nworth]

I don't know if it's on line (some of there stuff is, others aren't), but there was a pretty good piece by Lynn Radeka in the July/August View Camera (www.viewcamera.com). From time to time there have been articles in other magazines as well. Photo Techniques comes to mind. Try a Google search.

 

[Pupfish]

I haven't found either of my copies of it yet, but Ilfochrome themselves at one time published a very good (free) pamphlet on contrast masking for Ciba/Ilfochrome materials.

 

[Pupfish]

Erik, another thought-- you're not using P3X chemistry, are you? This is the commericial lab roller transport print machine soup that purportedly bumps up the contrast. (Can't say for sure, never used it but it crossed my mind. Low-contrast scenes--say those within a 4-stop range-- should print well on Ilfochrome without any masking at all, though you may notice a saturation bump).

Too, for the really critical work, someone once suggested that the 75˚F temp with regular P3 or P30 may be less contrasty than 86˚F. Whether or not that's irrefutable, I do remember mostly using 86˚F in later years whenever I wanted to print fast (2m-2m-2m as opposed to 3m-3m-3m) with little ill effect; but on days and projects when I was masking it slowed me down anyway so I did standardize on running at 75˚F. That was because in my Jobo CPP2, floating the three 4x5 trays for open processing of the masks also worked well at that temp.

Another thing that I found over half a dozen years of making and selling a ton of Ilfochrome prints was that while I could often look at a slide and probably nail exposure and color balance within 2 sheets of paper, I only did so after ramping up to it by religiously recording all the exposure details in a logbook for continual reference. This ingrained habit proved extremely valuable later, with masking.

Too, it'll help to have a densitometer or at least an easel meter (I used a ColorStar) to measure the actual contrast between the shadows and the highlights in a given transparency.

 

[Dug]

I haven't found either of my copies of it yet, but Ilfochrome themselves at one time published a very good (free) pamphlet on contrast masking for Ciba/Ilfochrome materials.

I have the pamphlet - let me see about scanning it...

 

[michaelbsc]

I have the pamphlet - let me see about scanning it...

That would be great. Can you attach something like a scan here? I suppose you could just make a jpeg out of it.

MB

 

[Pupfish]

Whattaya know, found both my copies of Masking and Advanced Printing Techniques for Ilfochrome Classic Materials (Print Materials and Display Films). Publication was Ilford's catalog #15867, copyright 1996, Ilford Photo. 32 pages.

It's copyrighted so I won't be posting the contents, but if someone wants one of the originals and has other interesting reading material to swap, make me an offer... and it's yours.

Found another Ilford Technical Information pamphlet, #15821 called Retouching Ilfochrome Materials (Print Materials and Display Films).
A quick perusal suggests I was quite mistaken about the retouching process in that Ciba/Ilfochrome is selectively bleached in the color layers before using retouching colors. Maybe the reason for my lapse is that I never attempted this because by the time I came along to print the stuff-- the actual Ilfochrome retouching dyes that matched the spectral response of the papers were already by that point either extinct or nowhere to be found.

Accordingly the occasional dust spot/scratch defect was something I variously lived with, or at times got rather frustrated with. (For instance with contrast mask in contact with the transparency, it's sometimes nearly impossible to use Edwal Scratch Remover.)

 

[Erik L]

Erik, another thought-- you're not using P3X chemistry, are you? This is the commericial lab roller transport print machine soup that purportedly bumps up the contrast. (Can't say for sure, never used it but it crossed my mind. Low-contrast scenes--say those within a 4-stop range-- should print well on Ilfochrome without any masking at all, though you may notice a saturation bump).

Too, for the really critical work, someone once suggested that the 75˚F temp with regular P3 or P30 may be less contrasty than 86˚F. Whether or not that's irrefutable, I do remember mostly using 86˚F in later years whenever I wanted to print fast (2m-2m-2m as opposed to 3m-3m-3m) with little ill effect; but on days and projects when I was masking it slowed me down anyway so I did standardize on running at 75˚F. That was because in my Jobo CPP2, floating the three 4x5 trays for open processing of the masks also worked well at that temp.



Another thing that I found over half a dozen years of making and selling a ton of Ilfochrome prints was that while I could often look at a slide and probably nail exposure and color balance within 2 sheets of paper, I only did so after ramping up to it by religiously recording all the exposure details in a logbook for continual reference. This ingrained habit proved extremely valuable later, with masking.

Too, it'll help to have a densitometer or at least an easel meter (I used a ColorStar) to measure the actual contrast between the shadows and the highlights in a given transparency.

Pupfish, Thanks much!
I have been using 92 degrees with the p30.2 kit in a jobo 2+2+2 mins per the instructions that came with the chemicals. I am using the moderate contrast paper. I haven't tried the lower temp and longer times. My inexperience with this material is evident, however I can get the exposures dead on for the midtones easily as my chromes are relatively consistent. Am I to assume that once I get the color balance correct with a batch of paper that I should not have to change it unless for artistic license? I have a beseler PM2L that came with some junk I picked up and have no clue how to use it as there are no instructions and it is not intuitive to me by looking at it.

Dug, that would great to see!

Thanks again all.
regards
Erik

 

[Pupfish]

Erik-- definitely try the coolest temp suggested by Ilford to see it helps with the contrast problem. Don't believe l ever once used P-30 at 92˚F, myself, having been alerted to the potential of increased contrast. So from me, it's just a well-circulated rumor, but it may indeed be the case and seems worth a try. Another side benefit of 75˚ is that I'd get more life out of the mixed chemistry, it'll oxidize slower at lower temps. Partly used bottles of bleach sitting in my processor with it running all the time were good for all of couple of days, tops, at 86˚.

I think I stand corrected on the process time at 86˚ though... just went and double checked the datasheet pinned on my D/R wall, and yep... 3 minutes, not 2.

The color balance of an individual paper pack should all be consistent, yes... Of course you have your paper pack filtration correction--which is usually a reasonably close approximation but not precise-- and your own enlarger filtration factor, which can change radically from what worked with a dying old bulb to the fresh new one you just replaced it with after dialing everything in. Welcome to the world of color printing.

Further, if you're are making big masked IC enlargements from 35mm, or for that matter any enlargement where exposure times run over a minute, reciprocity failure can start to cause minor shifts, so having the film technical data sheet at hand can be rather helpful, saving paper and bulbs on the really long long exposures. Uncorrected density/saturation shifts will be large beyond about one minute. This is from memory and might be a little faulty, but whole-stop progressions in reciprocity-failure-corrected time with CPM1M go something like 60 seconds to 180 seconds to 16 min to 45 min... filtration wasn't as weird or non-linear, fortunately. One key to consistent processing with Ilfochrome was standardize around one enlargement time as a base exposure, varying stops by aperture not by large time shifts, at least for the smaller common sizes. This all went out the window with bigger prints but 5x7's and 8x10s and unmasked 11x14s became relatively simple, very straightforward once I got a system down. It's reasonable to expect to make consistent prints. I was often making the same print 8-up and selling them side by side. They had to be really consistent.

Not being familiar with that Beseler color analyzer I can't help you too much there. I've only ever used an older Jobo ColorStar, which was an analog computer/ enlarging timer/simple match-needle --blinking LEDs, actually-- analyzer with adjustment sliders in only M&Y. Cyan was the base exposure level. Inscrutable as it was, it did prove useful as a metering timer, and for density measurements for estimating what strength masks I'd need.

 

[Erik L]

Again Pupfish, thanks for the help.
I will try the 75 degrees for 3 minutes routine. I am making 11x14's from 4x5 enlargements and 8x10 and 4x5 contact prints. I usually make a 4x5 contact print first so I don't have to waste paper and chemicals to get the exposure right. I set the head height to what would make a 11x14 enlargement so I don't have to interpolate another exposure time and it seems to work accurately going from 4x5 contact to 11x14 enlargement with same chrome. I see people mention long exposure times, but mine are short. 6 - 10 seconds at f16. I prefer to use f8 with my enlarger lens for sharpness reasons (135 componon s) but I am happy with the sharpness of the enlargements at f16 so far. I am using a d5xl with condenser head and 6x6 filters. I need some nd filters or add some color filters that equal nd together to get longer exposures. I am using cpm1m which is out of date, but looks good to my eye and I have kept it frozen but I don't know how it was stored before I received it.
I will try the lower temp tonight after dinner and see if that helps.
regards
Erik

 

[Pupfish]

Double check the timing with the new chemistry instructions... my memory may have been faulty on the developing, bleach and fixing times. (75˚F will no doubt be longer than the 3 minutes I seemed to recall, which it turns out was for 86˚F)

The other point you just mentioned for the first time is using a condenser head, had not even occurred to me to ask. While your exposure times may be brief and non-reciprocity-failure-inducing, a down side to a condenser head is that it increases contrast. (Dichroic heads are not merely for the simplification of changing filtration, but especially work better with Ilfochrome because because they're all designed around diffusers. Some designs are more diffuse than others. Diffusion also helps greatly with dust and scratches on reversal materials, as these show up as black, and not white spots on the print).

As regards exposure times, my set-ups were standardized around 30-60 second exposures. Not as tedious as it might sound since the other tools that were extremely useful for IC printing were custom cardboard dodging and burning masks and complex cutout pieces taped to wands. The longer times allow more swapping between tools, better control for 1/2 and 1/3 stop variations on dodging hotspots or burning in (animal's eyes, the moon) and less chance of the dodge tool showing up in the print by not moving it around enough. Easily half of my IC prints benefitted from advanced dodging and burning. The need for this is somewhat less necessary with masks, which was a good thing on the very long exposures.

This thread has got me to percolating about traditional printing once more-- as has my recent aquisition of a Meridian 45B, Nikkor SW 90 f/8 and other interesting goodies at fire-sale prices. Like one of those Minit Masks for 35mm with the raised ground center that I was reminiscing about earlier in the thread. Always wanted to try one back in the day but they were a little rich for my blood at $300-- just scored a pristine one from B&H for $30 last night.

Now if only someone can recommend an extremely bright yet evenly diffuse dichro head in 4x5, I may soon be in the market for a new (used) one.

 

[Claire Senft]

ZBE starlight.

 

[Pupfish]

A quick Google suggests these were perhaps less than reliable, electronically complicated to repair and also very expensive when new... has any of that been your experience with the ZBE Starlight?

Can't find a picture, someone mentions it uses a tube no longer in production for the light source? Halogen, or does it use an electronic flash tube? (If flash, how's that work out for tungsten balanced color materials like IC? What is the length of the exposure? Short like a flash pop and not pulsed, that kinda leaves out dodging and burning, I'd think... )

 

[boyooso]

Now if only someone can recommend an extremely bright yet evenly diffuse dichro head in 4x5, I may soon be in the market for a new (used) one.

The Starlight is nice, but automated, which I don't care for.

Devere 504 with twin bulbs is bright and even has a shutter in its head. 500watts of light.

Corey