New ILFORD Silver Gelatin Products ( Laser )

[Sean]

I am glad Ilford will create another revenue stream, this is good for all of us. I do hope that people and galleries call these prints "digital fibre" or something like this to differentiate them from traditional prints (rather than trying pull a fast one). I guess that is wishful thinking as many already call digital prints traditional prints, etc (just check ebay and several galleries). This might re-ignite the debate regarding a formal qualification for 100% traditional works so consumers know exactly what they are getting. So all in all my biggest fear are 1,000's of people calling their digital fibre prints "hand made traditional silver gelatin prints"..

 

[isaacc7]

What to call it?

They will probably call them silver gelatin prints. I think that you will find that hardly anyone really cares how the image is printed, as long as it looks good. For me, traditional printing materials offer a potential quality that nothing else can. How it gets put on the paper isn't really any concern of mine, I know quality when I see it and this paper will go a long ways towards opening up the high quality B&W print market. As an aside, if this does take off and it looks as good as it could, it may be the thing that convinces me to go totally digital, but I'll have to see the results. Up till now there really hasn't been a good B&W output available from digital files IMO. Very interesting times...

Isaac

 

[Sean]

I think that you will find that hardly anyone really cares how the image is printed, as long as it looks good.

Well if they are calling it anything other than the plain title of "photograph" then they must be doing this because they think someone does care, and if someone does care then why not just tell them it is a digital print or digital fiber? Is calling it "silver gelatin print" a way to hide something? If so I don't understand that myself, if I were printing digitally I would always say that was so in my print descriptions. I would say "Digital C-Print" or "Digital Fiber", etc and be proud of it.

 

[Helen B]

Simon,

Could you explain the reason for it to be panchromatic. Is it simply for ease of use in an RGB system, or is there a technical reason?

Thanks,
Helen

 

[Petzi]

Could you explain the reason for it to be panchromatic. Is it simply for ease of use in an RGB system, or is there a technical reason?

I have been wondering about that, too. It has to be usable in existing laser equipment like Durst Lambda. I guess that, through the panchromatic paper, you just get more exposure. If you used a regular graded paper, only one of the three lasers would actually expose the paper. The others would be mostly ineffective. Whether or not you could compensate for that by turning up the laser power, making a longer exposure etc. I don't know. Probably depends on the machine.

I guess this paper is basically a variation of Galerie FB resp. Ilfospeed RC.

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

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

Laser output is the intention, of course, but I'm asking if there might be an alternate use for this paper as a substitute for Panalure in making projection prints directly from C-41 color negs.

Why would someone want to do that, you ask? They might want to avoid digital artifacts, or they might just want to make such prints in their own darkrooms with equipment they have, since Lambda/LightJet/Chromira printers are out of the price range of most individual users.

 

[George Papantoniou]

My opinion...

A. It's good for Ilford to have one more product that will increase the yearly profit, in order to remain a financially healthy company (something we all desire)...

B. This kind of products MIGHT help decrease the total number of films sold, since the development of new and better ways of digital printing (MIGHT) push some more people to digital capture.

C. Sean is absolutely right saying that more idiots might be able to sell digital prints claiming they are traditional ones.

D. If the points B and C are correct, Ilford might be making a wrong marketing decision to fabricate the new paper, since it's mainly a traditional photo industry and this may affect the sales of some other of its products, mainly film and film processing chemicals...

 

[haris]

And there is already enlarger to make digital images onto any silver gelatine paper, DeVere504D.

 

[Petzi]

Relax folks. This is an alternative to b/w inkjet printing. I threatens neither the market share for optical products, nor inkjet printers. This is a high end product. It fills a niche that was not occupied by any other product so far.

 

[Tom Kershaw]

Relax folks. This is an alternative to b/w inkjet printing. I threatens neither the market share for optical products, nor inkjet printers. This is a high end product. It fills a niche that was not occupied by any other product so far.

Well put.

 

[Bob Carnie]

I have used three different fibre papers on my Lambda. one did not work, but I was trying to make digital lith prints. the amount of power required to produce the massive overexposure for lith developing confused the computer and myself. Agfa Classic was used for three years and worked really well. We would convert to greyscale to print and the three lasers would fire off enough energy to make this paper work well.
The New Ilford Digital FB is the third paper I have used, We do not convert to grey scale but print in RGB. what we have noticed is better tonal seperations of the various colour values in the original scene, transparancy, colour negative, or digital capture.Much like the effect of panalure will capture better colour rendition than regular black and white paper, that seems to block up dramatically when printing from colour negatives.
I believe this is Harmons reason for the extended red sensitivity of the paper , plain and simple.
Regarding Energy used, I think the new paper requires less laser power to complete the task than lets say Agfa Classic.
The engineers at Harmon and Durst or Cymbolic science would be able to give a more accurate answer.

I have been wondering about that, too. It has to be usable in existing laser equipment like Durst Lambda. I guess that, through the panchromatic paper, you just get more exposure. If you used a regular graded paper, only one of the three lasers would actually expose the paper. The others would be mostly ineffective. Whether or not you could compensate for that by turning up the laser power, making a longer exposure etc. I don't know. Probably depends on the machine.

I guess this paper is basically a variation of Galerie FB resp. Ilfospeed RC.

 

[Petzi]

Good point. People have done this before Ilford released their new paper. I have rolls of Agfa b/w paper by the way which is marked "laser ready". Unfortunately I don't have the Lambda to try this out.

If you convert RGB input to grayscale before output, basically any graded, VC or panchromatic paper should work, and give correct tonal rendition, provided that you can get enough exposure on the paper.

 

[Harry Lime]

D. If the points B and C are correct, Ilford might be making a wrong marketing decision to fabricate the new paper, since it's mainly a traditional photo industry and this may affect the sales of some other of its products, mainly film and film processing chemicals...

If Ilford didn't come up with this paper, it would only be a matter of time before someone else did and I would rather see them be the first through the door and establish themselves as the industry standard, than some other company that doesn't care as much about film and supporting analog materials.

This could turn into a very nice and steady revenue stream for Ilford. That's a good thing for anyone who shoots their films!


HL

 

[George Papantoniou]

I sincerely hope so.

 

[Helen B]

The tonal rendering issue would be easy to fix, so that graded or VC paper could produce exactly the same tonal rendering as panchromatic paper. Based on what Bob says, therefore, it sounds like it could be panchro for convenience. I'd love to hear the official story. I know that there are other people investigating other ways of printing digitally onto traditional B&W paper, so the market for it could grow.

Best,
Helen
PS Wouldn't this thread be more appropriate for the hybrid forum?

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

PS Wouldn't this thread be more appropriate for the hybrid forum?

Yes, but Sean hasn't filled us in about moving things between forums, so for now, I suppose it's here.

 

[MattKing]

Wouldn't this thread be more appropriate for the hybrid forum?

Not necessarily, given the question about whether it can be exposed optically, and used in a traditional darkroom as a replacement for panalure.

Hmm - I wonder if anyone has ever tried to construct an optical enlarger, using a laser as a (point) light source??

Matt

 

[JBrunner]

They will probably call them silver gelatin prints. I think that you will find that hardly anyone really cares how the image is printed, as long as it looks good.
Isaac

I disagree. You may find more people care than you think, at least where it matters. The unintentional misrepresentation, and mis-understanding of what the results of their own work represents is rampant in the amateur world, but it doesn't wash in collectors circles.

The really exciting thing here is that Ilford continues to introduce new products into the silver gelatin product line, and I don't believe this product will hurt traditional darkroom work in any way. If anything, it may pull more new blood into the darkroom, as some people slowly begin to realize the unmarketed truth.

 

[Gibran]

A few thoughts on this... as regards vintage images. The artistic value of most of these images is in the very fact that they were hand printed by the photographer in most cases with their physical body as part of the process in the dodging and burning which resulted in the final image. Remember Ansel "The negative is the score and the print is the performance". Its not just about the material, never was. Its about the process and with traditional materials and processes, that almost always involves the physical "imprint" which is imparted upon the final work. Weather printing an archived vintage negative or printing contemporary work, this process removes the artist from that process and replaces him/her by a purely automated process devoid of the artist hand(despite the finishing hand processing in the actual chemistry). So, yes this process is a direct competitor to ink jet but what bothers me is that it pretends to be something more and the marketing of these prints will try and build on that. I see this as having a negative impact ultimately however profitable it may be for ilford as it will result in confusion as to the value of a hand made print. But thats just my take on it.

 

[Bob Carnie]

I would agree that a vintage print is a vintage print*one made by the artist*
However I can assure you as a full time custom printer , this new process is every bit as *original* and worthy as any hand print done in my darkroom. whether I am using my Cromega difussion croma bulbs, or my Omega Condensor 250 watt silvania bulb, or my Point light source bulb. It is a differerent tool plain and simple. The dodging, burning , print finishing ,toning is identical in its application and permanence.
I have built a buisness on traditional printing, and this move to this paper and digital device is one of many options that I offer my clients for a variety of reasons..We are fortunate here to have almost every output device printing onto ciba to platinum. I see this product as a very viable additional option for artists * your statement about removing the artist from the physical *imprint*is as far from reality as I can imagine.
When a photographer commisions me to print for them there is a trust that I can produce a print that is much to their vision of what a particular image should look like. *this is a very hard thing to do and I can say their are not many people who can handle this responsibility*. The photographer only hopes that I can accomplish this for them .
Now with this new product and the reality of PS I would argue that photographers can do their own dodge burn contrast adjustment to their liking and then hand off to me a file that I would then process for them.
I see the photographer in this instance haveing more control or putting their PHYSICAL IMPRINT on their work. This is the reality in the working world today of colour and now it will be some photograhers means of producing work with more control in black and white fibre.
Only time will tell , if this product will a viable option for permanent prints.
I will bet the farm that it is and this new direction will introduce black and white silver prints with archival attributes to a whole new legion of young artists who will embrace this wonderful new product.

A few thoughts on this... as regards vintage images. The artistic value of most of these images is in the very fact that they were hand printed by the photographer in most cases with their physical body as part of the process in the dodging and burning which resulted in the final image. Remember Ansel "The negative is the score and the print is the performance". Its not just about the material, never was. Its about the process and with traditional materials and processes, that almost always involves the physical "imprint" which is imparted upon the final work. Weather printing an archived vintage negative or printing contemporary work, this process removes the artist from that process and replaces him/her by a purely automated process devoid of the artist hand(despite the finishing hand processing in the actual chemistry). So, yes this process is a direct competitor to ink jet but what bothers me is that it pretends to be something more and the marketing of these prints will try and build on that. I see this as having a negative impact ultimately however profitable it may be for ilford as it will result in confusion as to the value of a hand made print. But thats just my take on it.

 

[Gibran]

Bob, my understanding(which could be wrong so set me straight here), was that these prints are made by a machine which uses a laser to expose the paper directly from the digital file. You state "the dodging, burning , print finishing ,toning is identical in its application and permanence." So are you saying that you are physically dodging and burning the projected image with your hands and not with Photoshop before the image is exposed? If so, then I stand corrected. If not, and the "dodging and burning" is taking place in the digital realm, then I fully disagree with you. The Process is completely different. By "physical imprint" I'm speaking in the literal sense. I don't doubt you have more control over the image in Photosop, in fact, you most certainly would. But the process is day and night different and the results are infomed by the process. I work with both wide format ink jet printing and traditional darkroom analog printing in my studio(producing limited edition prints for Museums here in Florida) as well, though certainly not at the level you are doing, and though I have infinitly more control with a mouse and tablet over an image in photoshop, there is simply no comparison in a hands on physical sense between dodging and burning in Photoshop versus under an enlarger head. Its analogous to playing a video game or being a participant in the actual event.

 

[Gibran]

I should also mention that as both an exhibiting artist and Gallery owner myself, a one of a kind analog print holds more value to the knowledgeable art buyer. That is one that is entirely unique and can never be exactly reproduced. Hand Toning and processing will get you there part of the way BUT the real difference here is that the exact dodging and burning when down physically under a projected image will never be the same with two prints. Thats just not the case with the precise, set in stone photoshopped digital image. The image would pretty much be the same every time. That interpretation/performance is done once in the computer. How boring would it be to hear each favorite symphony or musical piece performed the exact same way everytime you went to a live concert? That variation, while not precise and exact, is the vary nature and value of Art and is Uniquely human.

 

[Bob Carnie]

Gibran

You have hit upon an unique aspect of how I approach a print whether it be PS or by hand.
I am 30 years into printing with my hands under an enlarger , using different shapes , contrasts , bla bla bla.
I just started using PS one year ago hands on.*sorry for the pun*.
In the past I would tell my techician how I want the print to look and be frustrated with their approach to the work station.
Kevin who is my partner had a serious illness last summer which forced me to literally get on the computer and work the files myself.
I do not approach an image any different with PS as I would with a traditional approach. I set my density and contrast to a level I like, I then clean the file *dust bust* just like I would clean a negative.
I will set a dodge selection , set a brush size and basically go over the image exactly like I would traditionally.
I the set a burn selection and add density to the image exactly the same way I would to a traditional print.
If I want to diffuse areas I go about it the same way.
In my darkroom traditional,, each print is separated by three filter split printing... * shawdow>midtone> highlight* I have been doing this for 10years now much like what Les Mclean would teach in any of his workshops.
I have found in PS that there are tools to control the shawdows, midtones and highlights.
I do not alter images by cloning and montaging even though I have done this in my past life traditionally and now possible with PS.
* I may but right now I do not.*
I guess what I am trying to say is that PS put in the hands of a traditional printer is very much like a traditional approach. PS was designed by a group of artists with photographic printing as its basic principle.
This new paper is Gallerie grade 4, with an extended red sensitivitey. It is being produced to be used by printers worldwide.
It is not any different than a traditional black and white paper that you and I use each day other than its unique features.

Personally I love printing both ways and will continue to do so for my life.
A small aside which may or may not be relevent to this discussion.
I posted a thread late last week regarding a complete analogue starter kit.
Enlarger, easel, processing reels . Enough to get a young photographer started in 35mm printing.
To this date I have not seen one response to a free start up kit.

Imagine if my offer had been , Scanner, epson printer ect.

 

[Gibran]

Bob, yes I agree that Photoshop in the hands of an experienced Darkroom Artist and or PHotographer is very powerful and offers precise control. I would be lost in my day to day Commercial work without Photoshop and such precise powerful tools such as the spot healing brush, Shadow/Highlight adjustment, Selective color and great plug-ins such as PhotoKit(Terrific global Dodgeing and Burning tools in this plug in). But, my only point which still stands is that your physical body and direct(not indirect input through a mouse or tablet) affect on the image and final print is simply and directly physically carried out differently. There is value as I'm very sure you know in that direct physical, not just mental connection to the print.

 

[Bob Carnie]

Gibran
Since I have to process the paper myself and it does not spit out of a machine I get the same satisfaction as a analoque print.
Just as with inkjet , once the print is finished I am very happy with the results.
Does not a father have the same satisfaction when his child is born , even though he does not carry and physically deliver the child to the world?