New ILFORD Silver Gelatin Products ( Laser )

Dear All,

In a couple of threads I have seen comments on the 'new' ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology products for laser exposure, including opinions on
whether these are a 'good' thing, in relation to analog processes :

Firstly, I will explain about the new products, some time ago we did make make an RC paper for exposure through laser machines namely the DURST Lambda and the Cymbolic Science ( Now Oce ) Lightjet. We have recently significantly improved and relaunched this product, but at PHOTOKINA we announced the launch of our new GALERIE Fibre Base version, which will be available around the World very soon. This product has been pre-launch trialled in some of the most famous pro labs in the World, including ELAVATOR in Toronto, with the very talented Mr.Carnie and team, and to say that its creating a bit of a stir... that is most certainly an understatement.

It could not be simpler, you print ( up to 50" wide ) from a digital file via laser to the paper which is PANCHROMATIC, the quality is in my humble opinion, simply 'stunning' . As an aside it has already stimulated the production of automatic wide format processors for Fibre Base....unheard of...

When people comment that it encourages people to go digital, I fundamentally disagree, what it does is enable people who have a digital file
to go back to silver gelatin for the output, in other words, the highest quality image with the greatest stability and achival properties. It no longer has to be printed on colour paper or inkjet paper, and can be printed to a huge size
on silver gelatin.

Can you imagine how many negatives in the World, including some of the greatest images, by the greatest photographers, or the greatest collections of historical importance that have now have been digitised, so as to protect, preserve and store the original negative and that can now be printed on what is the original media they were intended for....without any loss in quality* I think that has to be a positive thing.

* Although I most certainly accept they will look different as they are not 'hand' printed

It also enables professional photographers, whose clients insist that they shoot on digital ( and lets be honest lots do ) can go back to silver gelatin for the output, lots of the highest quality point of sale material is now printed on these products, and it looks fabulous, in a totally different stratosphere than a wide format ink jet. This has to be a revenue stream for us going forward, to enable us to continue to develop new silver gelatin products ( of all types ) that customers want to buy, to re-inforce and grow the ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology Limited business.

I put this forward as a debating point, and look forward to the comments of the members of APUG, whose comments we value and note, whether we agree or not.

Simon Galley, ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology Limited.

That's a great new, as I haven't liked having anyone else handling my negs and doing hand prints of them.

Simon,
I can hardly wait to try this out.
Which lab in the UK should I contact?

Alan Clark

Although I continue to be committed to the darkroom, this still sounds like a great product. Now if only digital archiving..., um...

Long live film (Delta 100)

Dear Alan,

The FB version is brand new, and only very few labs in the World have the capability to use it, and even fewer have access to it at the present time
ILFORD Photo will be producing an approved list of labs when we officially launch, I must also warn you that 'cost wise' using this product will not be like engaging a normal lab to print a mono hand print..

The UK trial lab is Argenta in London ( Metro )

Regards

Simon.

Not to welcome material like this would be foolish even from a totally analog point of view. What's vital, to me at least, is that people not lose sight of what fine, fiber-based, photographic paper does to make an image 'sing'. In a digital inkjet world it's all too easy to forget what such a really fine print looks like. Bravo Ilford!!

If it enhances the demand for baryta paper base, it sounds like a good thing.

Since it is panchromatic, is it potentially a replacement for Panalure for direct B&W printing of color negs (for those who don't want to go through the intermediate step of scanning and converting to B&W)? Bob Carnie--since you have this paper, how about popping a color neg in an enlarger and giving it a go?

David A. Goldfarb said:

If it enhances the demand for baryta paper base, it sounds like a good thing.

Since it is panchromatic, is it potentially a replacement for Panalure for direct B&W printing of color negs (for those who don't want to go through the intermediate step of scanning and converting to B&W)? Bob Carnie--since you have this paper, how about popping a color neg in an enlarger and giving it a go?

Click to expand...

This might get my son out of his cave (bedroom with computer gear everywhere) to try doing some other darkroom work.

If this keeps Ilford going forward, I applaud it. As a business we have to do what we need to do to keep the doors open. As a photographer, if it gets people back into the wet darkroom, will the rest ie film be far behind?

Simon R Galley said:

...but at PHOTOKINA we announced the launch of our new GALERIE Fibre Base version, which will be available around the World very soon.

Click to expand...

I'm actually interested in this paper. I'm not sure I can justify it's supposedly high price (something like 3x the cost of a print from the same machine on RC paper, yes?). But I'm interested enough to follow it and try it at least a couple of times.

My real question is how do the labs process long rolls of fiber based non-RA-4 paper? In particular, how do they wash this paper to archival standards?

Please do tell us more.

I think the long term worrying aspect for users of Ilford products and for the company's long term viability would be if Ilford wasn't making announcements like this along with the improved flatter fibre paper, new selenium toner and others I may not have mentioned.

pentaxuser

Well, if I can get fibre based silver gelatin print from my digital image, why should I bother with film? I will shoot digital.

No, I will continue to use film, but you understand me.

This paper can be something good for Ilford/Harman, and for digital image makers. On the other hand, it can be threat to sell of Ilford/Harman films (and other films too, but this way Ilford/Harman with one product can make a threat to its other products)...

So, I don't know really...

Bruce Watson said:

I'm actually interested in this paper. I'm not sure I can justify it's supposedly high price (something like 3x the cost of a print from the same machine on RC paper, yes?). But I'm interested enough to follow it and try it at least a couple of times.

My real question is how do the labs process long rolls of fiber based non-RA-4 paper? In particular, how do they wash this paper to archival standards?

Please do tell us more.

Click to expand...

Processed by hand. Here is the link to more info on the Elevator site:
http://www.elevatordigital.ca/pages/digitalfibre.htm

Jon

Shouldn't this thread be hosted on HybridPhoto.com?

haris said:

Well, if I can get fibre based silver gelatin print from my digital image, why should I bother with film? I will shoot digital.

No, I will continue to use film, but you understand me.

This paper can be something good for Ilford/Harman, and for digital image makers. On the other hand, it can be threat to sell of Ilford/Harman films (and other films too, but this way Ilford/Harman with one product can make a threat to its other products)...

So, I don't know really...

Click to expand...

I see the opposite happening: digital shooters getting a look at their photos on REAL fiber based B&W emulsion would likely want to explore this film thing a little deeper once they see the quality. Sales of film and chemicals goes up. Very shrewd on the part of Ilford!

Joe

question no one is asking. How much do those new enlargers cost that do this lazer thing? Do they take special lenses? I have no idea about that end, and I have a good enlarger now, why switch. But for those who do have the enlarger and want to go that route, GREAT!

Simon, Can the paper be used under a standard enlarger light? I see yet another market if it can, a Panalure replacement. I am still looking forward to trying the new toner when it is available in the U.S. Thank you! Ilford

Aggie, Around 50,000-100,000 or so for for a durst lambda 130 used. It is for high volume labs to make very large prints. Not home users.

I have mixed feelings about it. Digital folks will now say see can print grain free b&W also. The other side of the coin is as mentioned people see the beauty of these prints and want to get into B&W darkroom work.

My favorite part of this paper is imagine having some of Weston and Adam's work reprint on this instead of cheap RC ra4 paper. I have 3 of Adam's national parks series on my walls printed on cheap poster paper.

It might be viable for those who want paper negatives in a pinhole camera too.

David
I have 12 rolls backordered as we speak, I have not tried it under an enlarger as yet, I am still getting my feet wet with this lovely paper. Just finished a toning *sepia* run and it looks very nice. The paper reacts just like any cold tone.
We are at a stage where we have produced gallery shows , that intermix cold tone traditional prints and this new product. The acceptance is very high.
We are developing , fixing, hypo clear washing and toning like any fibre paper,, It has forced me to enlarge our main fibre room, as well my local competition is going to join us to strenghten the talent on the wet side of our lab.
If one scans TriX you will get the same grain structure as your traditional prints. The Lambda is very , very high resolution and you will see neg grain, which is very sharp edge to edge, in fact this is where some problems occur as the image will show sharpness not seen from a proof print .
We are working now on some very known images in the historical aspect that Simon spoke of. The results from scanned vintage, negs, glass plates and photographs is very good.
What is very obvious to me is the benifit to my analoque printing as now there is another tool to work with and young shooters who only know digital can see traditional prints from negative and from their files and judge for themselves the suitability of one over the other.
The Laser printer is more like 250k investment with Durst doing credit checks and analysing the viability of placing these units . A maintenence contract on a device is 30k per year.
There are digital heads that are on the market place that were 50k new , and I believe that this is an area where some manufactures will jump on board to produce a product that will fit on home enlargers.
To those who dismiss the cost of this equipment I can only say that in 1990 when I was buying my first analoque equipment the costs were daunting and took a very deep cut into my financial picture to work in fibre.
Nothing has changed except the device is much more expensive but it is like having 10 enlargers in one with its capabilities.
Like any digital device, give it three years and it will become financial viable. Just make sure the unit that you are thinking of has the resolution that you require,
I know this is now more of a grey area post , but I cannot answer any of the questions without going into some specifics about the digital gear.

Dear Simon -


This announcement is the answer to my prayers of the past few years.

Thank you! Thank you! Thank you!

My friends and I have spent years dreaming about being able to utilize something like a Lightjet with a good fiber paper.


For me the situation is as such:

I have no intention of abandoning black and white film, mainly for aesthetic reason, but also for practical ones, such as long term storage of my images. I also haven't found a camera that can replace my Leicas and that includes the M8, because of the x1.33 multiplier and the 'look' of digital.

But regardless of my devotion to analog capture, I do own a good scanner and print a large portion of my images on a Lightjet, regardless of the fact that the currently available RC paper is less than ideal. I still print a percentage of my negatives wet, but there are several limitations that prevent me from doing more.


There are several reasons, why I went this route.

a) I do not have the space for a permanent darkroom

b) I do not have the practice or training to produce a truly professional wet print of great complexity. I do fine with straight forward negatives, but anything that involves complex dodging/burning is beyond my skill set.

c) Unfortunately I do not have the time to really train myself to become a master printer and frankly I would rather be out shooting.

d) On the other hand I have 20 years of experience in digital imaging, my specialty being color correction for film and commercials. This is how I have made a living as a professional for the past 15 years and thus the "Film->Scanner ->Dig. Manipulation -> Digital output " pipeline is very familiar to me.

e) I can't afford to take my negs to a professional wet printer, but still demand prints of a certain quality. Given my professional skills I can produce prints of this caliber myself, but only via digital output. The missing piece of the puzzle has been the lack of a good fiber paper for laser enlargers. Digital output also allows me to produce a print that conforms exactly to my vision.

f) When producing a digital print I do not manipulate it beyond what is possible in a traditional darkroom. I do not rearrange the composition or add additional elements. I dust-bust, dodge/burn, adjust the contrast etc. and generally try to manipulate the image as little as possible.

I think it is a terrific move by Ilford to fill this void and I hope it provides a stable and steady stream of revenue for your company, so you can continue to produce your entire portfolio of products.

You can see my work here
www.elanphotos.com


Thanks,


HL

I am very excited for this development as well. I would love to be able to print a series of prints that are very consistent. This is requested by some galleries that request several prints of a particular image.

The second point is that as an archivalist (is that a word?) I fear an entire generations images lost to a computer media crash.

I am a forth generation photographer. I have images from the late 1800's and I think of the social and cultural importance of these images. I feel that I have a real connection to the past and my family. I fear that without such a product, this wouldn't be possible without efforts like these from Ilford.

My hat is off to you gentlemen.

Sincerely,

Though this will be 99% aimed at labs with the digital enlargers, I hope it can spark more interest in analog/traditional darkroom products. The increased revenue for Ilford/Harmon should be good for the rest of us (without $100K enlargers) and the continued production of traditional film and paper.

This probably will not be a method I will use, but it thrills me that Ilford is inventing, thinking about the future and moving forward. Thank you Ilford. Thank you Simon.

I am excited also because I don't always shoot B&W. Sometimes I only have color slide with me and make an image that would be great on B&W. It would be wonderful to scan it and have it printed on real paper.

It's all about freedom. Shoot whatever you like, let's say film, scan it and do not mess with negs up and down to the lab, print yourself from the original or outsource an huge run if you want to. It won't be artisanal, but you will get quality at a price that you probably can't offer if you have to handprint a whole lot to do not say what's up if you're digital.

They are just good news to my ears.

David A. Goldfarb said:

...how about popping a color neg in
an enlarger and giving it a go?

Click to expand...

No enlarger needed as I read it. But will it print by
enlarger is the question? Shoot, develop, scan, print.
Print on the new Silver Gelatin Laser paper with a
Laser printer. Dan