The Fate of Ilfochrome

[Ektagraphic]

Do you make a reversal RA-4 through scanning and printing?

 

[Photo Engineer]

An ilfochrome bleach is:

50 g/l Sulfamic Acid
0.5 g/l phenazine.

I'll try to look up a better one later on, but this one works fairly well. The problem is that phenazine is hard to get and has been reported to be a carcinogen. Ilford (Swiss) uses a different catalyst as did Kodak and I have some better substitutes here somewhere.

If iterested, let me know but this is a difficult task to balance the catalyst with the dyes at the right acid level. It is usually about pH 1.0

PE

 

[Poisson Du Jour]

I'm afraid that Ilford is killing Ilfochrome with too high pricing . That's a shame because I like Ilfochrome printing and would like to do it more, but now it seems to be more expensive than ever before. Now I just project my slides and if I need a print I make Reversal RA-4 that's over ten times cheaper than Ilfochrome.

It would help much if there was a working recipe for Ilfochrome bleach. The official chemistry is very expensive.

The prices I am paying have not changed since 2005, while prices for those who order panoprints have skyrocketed. Keep things in perspective though: reserve printing to Ilfochrome for your very, very, very best photographs that you intend to frame and exhibit or even sell. RA-4 (scanned from tranny) is fine for stat prints or giving out samples, just that Ilfochromes of your very best work will have the "Wow" factor +10 when exhibited. Even in this uber-digital take-up age, many photographically disconnected members of the public viewing exhibited Ilfochromes will tell you they've never seen or known such prints.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Sorry, but you can't scan an RA4 print from a transparency, you must start with a negative unless you cross process.

Transparencies made from anything via digital means, if color, are quite low in quality. This is not the place to go into that, but technology in digital has certainly not caught up in this area in any way.

PE

 

[Poisson Du Jour]

Sorry, but you can't scan an RA4 print from a transparency, you must start with a negative unless you cross process.

Transparencies made from anything via digital means, if color, are quite low in quality. This is not the place to go into that, but technology in digital has certainly not caught up in this area in any way.

PE

That's interesting, because at the time I my RA-4 prints were returned with scans on a floppy disk ("What's a floppy disk?" my young nephew asked...) even though I didn't ask for scans. As the RA-4 prints never met with my exhibition standard, Ilfochromes were then pursued with gusto. Nowadays it's quicker to get a drum scan scan from a tranny at the high street store and print ultra-cheaply to Fuji crystal archive paper and give out these rough stats to clients. RA-4 still takes 2-3 days turnaround, which is too long. And these labs tell me I should "catch up and go digital". Cute.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Garyh;

You do not understand the neg pos systems fully then. What were the originals? That would be my first question.

In any event, you are talking about scans from (something) and scans can be very sub standard.

PE

 

[Poisson Du Jour]

Trannies were supplied to the Lab, RA-4 prints came back with scans on a floppy — a process that was common then, but not now, nor were the scans asked for.

You're correct about scans: even drum scans leave me circumspect. I much prefer clients to view Ilfochromes and not scans or stat prints; not always possible, but it is strongly preferred.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Ok, then in your process, there was an inversion step to make the slide into a negative. This produced the RA4 prints and also reduced quality. The scans were not good and did not take into account the negative gamma and the proper masking, I would guess.

PE

 

[Poisson Du Jour]

Whatever. I have already stated my obvious dissatisfaction with RA-4s for anything other than sub-optimal representations of my work for briefing, and even now small Ilfochromes are much better at getting the message across, but where time is critical and the client has been informed of the differences, machine prints will be fine until I can get them over the lightbox to look at the trannies and then also the resulting Ilfos.

I had no use at all for the scans provided to me with the prints; I remember though they were huge (Mb). Besides the point, RA-4 prints from 1997 are patently bloody awful beside Ilfochromes of the same images!

 

[hrst]

Do you make a reversal RA-4 through scanning and printing?

No, I mean I just cross-process RA-4 paper with BW paper developer as a first developer, then wash and fog with light and do normal RA-4 dev & blix. Works better with Kodak paper. Fuji CA must be pre-rinsed before first dev and gives greenish blacks. The process is posted here many times. I wouldn't talk about anything non-analog in APUG, although I'm also doing some scanning .

Of course the Reversal RA-4 quality is not even near to Ilfochrome (or scanning&printing) but still it works and gives usable images with high contrast and long shoulder and some color crossover. But over ten times cheaper price and room temp tray processing possibility inspires me to do it.

Just as Poisson Du Jour said, Ilfochrome is just for the very best few shots.
Unless you are rich. The problem is that the paper and especially chemicals have a limited shelf life. Even though we have a photography club, still we don't do enough Ilfochrome due to it's price. The club should have more members interested in Ilfochrome, then we could stock the material. Now we have about five persons who do color prints.

I guess that if Ilfochrome was cheaper---even if it still was five times more expensive than RA-4, but not ten times like now---people would use it so much more that it still would be profitable to Ilford. It is just so discouraging to make test exposures and so on and lose all your money before even getting the decent print. You must have room to experiment.

PE, thanks for the bleach formula! We are going to try it out (if I can source some phenazine) because we have some Ilfochrome paper but the chemicals are probably exhausted.

 

[Photo Engineer]

There are probably better and more modern catalysts. I'll try to get some information.

PE

 

[richard1500]

Hello, I want to start making Ilfochromes again, lately (4 years or so) I´d been wanting to buy chemicals again for Ilfochrome, but I don´t find the P-30 that I used, what can I do? I need to print some 50 11x14 and some 20 16x20 prints. I do not care about the cost, but which chemicals should I buy? I have a Durst Color Processor that has 3 different chemicals batch. Could someone tell me what to do. I would feel so bad if all my Fujichrome slides end up being scanned and printed like a digital Image:-(

 

[Roger Cole]

Hello, I want to start making Ilfochromes again, lately (4 years or so) I´d been wanting to buy chemicals again for Ilfochrome, but I don´t find the P-30 that I used, what can I do? I need to print some 50 11x14 and some 20 16x20 prints. I do not care about the cost, but which chemicals should I buy? I have a Durst Color Processor that has 3 different chemicals batch. Could someone tell me what to do. I would feel so bad if all my Fujichrome slides end up being scanned and printed like a digital Image:-(

Are you in the US? Freestyle can get P30 for you. It's not a web item; you have to call them.

 

[lightwisps]

Finding Ilfochrome chemicals in Canada

I live outside of Ottawa, Ontario. Any idea of where I can buy the chemestry for Ilfochrome?

Thanks, Don

 

[ndrs]

I have a feeling that you haven't heard about Ilfochrome discontinuance letters sent out a few weeks ago. This time it seems to be for real.

http://noringcircus.blogspot.com/2011/10/death-of-analogue-photography.html
http://www.aphog.de/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=19218
http://kodachromeproject.com/forum/showpost.php?p=7260&postcount=44

As I understand it, they are willing to do a final coating IF there's sufficient demand ('sufficient' being undefined) and paper will be available in rolls only. The deadline for orders is end of November 2011, orders can be paid in monthly instalments, and they will store the rolls until Juni 2013. There will also be a 30% price increase.

Could anybody who received this letter confirm? Can we non-commercial users somehow co-operate and place a significant enough order through a reseller?

 

[Rudeofus]

This is, if confirmed, indeed a royal bummer, it's not like Ilford Switzerland cordially supported Ilfochrome anyways during the last few years. Here's what I plan on doing:

• Paper can be stored in the freezer for many years according to what I have found in relevant forum postings. So I will stock what I plan on using over the next few years so I can continue to print my favorite slides.
• Chemistry is more short lived according to these same postings but should last for 1-2 years, at least after heavy color corrections.
• Chemistry will be either available after that or I will look into home brewing. There are a few threads here on APUG which describe recipes and refer to further info: (there was a url link here which no longer exists) and (there was a url link here which no longer exists).

It's really time for us slide shooters to put our freezers to use and to boost our knowledge in organic chemistry. I've already stocked up on Fuji Astia 100F and, just in case, Kodak E100VS. This should buy me 5 more years before I either convert to C41 and B&W or just give up photography altogether. It was fun while it lasted.

 

[Poisson Du Jour]

The writing has been on the wall for a long time now regarding Ilfochrome; I am not at all surprised it is ending. Realistically, it is pointless grandstanding to suddenly feel the urge to stock up on chems, papers and whatnot and assume you can keep running the process well into the future. That's crystal ball stuff that has been tried many times before by home hobbyists. Make what you have last as long as you can, but don't get bogged down in nostalgia. Move along and transition — analogue to digital; if you do not, all you will have are slides and not a skerrick of skill to manage any processing of them in the post-analogue era, where darkrooms and wet chems had then become a nostalgic era for poignant reflection, rather than treating the coming end of it as a catalyst for change and skilling up so that you can rest assured that so long as film is available you can still make something of it rather than turn your back on photography altogether. That's not something I will be doing with my forward plans, which are analoguous photography and dproduction.

Let's not forget that Ilfochrome lost legions of dedicated analogue photographers here in Australia with the closure of the last long-term pro-level lab in Adelaide. The exodus away from analogue printing's finest was profound. Of those I know of, all shifted immediately to digital, some retired, others dropped photography, like the mournful tune of the Last Post: a life of dedication to the process wasn't enough to save it, much less a scattering of people around the globe. Time and time again labs were railed by tardiness on the other side of the globe. It's not that Switzerland cared much for deadlines, delivery etiquette, quality control or a litany of other disturbing problems that harried labs working the very expensive Ilfochrome process, such as faulty, scratched, spoilt or unsuitable media. We're probably better off without it now that other processes are getting a serious leg-up on the old bastion of prints. My 320 bespoke 'chromes over 21 years will serve as a lasting reminder of what it was like. But it's time to move on. Like all those similarily disaffected, I am still working in analogue (transparencies) using film cameras, but actively transitioning to alternative process production.

 

[Roger Cole]

Well poo.

I won't buy any. I had thought about it, but I can't really afford to stock up on large amounts, and I won't get back into a process that won't be around for at least a few years.

As far as "turning my back on photography" that is EXACTLY what I will do if I can no longer get analog materials for black and white. Tried digital, it's a huge yawn for me. Sure I'll take snapshots but that's it. I'm just not interested, not interested in being interested, not for me, finis. I have plenty of other hobbies.

Fortunately black and white is my first and real love anyway.

 

[OzJohn]

With respect Roger, I think most photographers who love colour and I'm one of them have realised by now that it is only a matter of time before digital is the only option available. Black and white is a different story and will probably be around for decades. It also seems, based on what I read on APUG, entirely feasible for individuals or groups to make their own monochrome materials but I am totally unconvinced that the same is true for subtractive multilayer colour materials.

I still use a little colour negative film, black & white materials and have most of my professional digital colour printed on RA4 paper. But I am firm that as those materials become unavailable, I will switch that component to digital. I will neither hoard materials (apart from a few rolls for their historic value only) nor attempt to manufacture them. First and foremost I am a practitioner of photography - not film or digital photography just photography and it takes the same knowledge and experience to make a good photo irrespective of how the camera captures the image or how it is ultimately reproduced. OzJohn

 

[Bob Carnie]

Every single point in this post is correct, the manufacturer in Switzerland let the ball down , plain and simple, I loved the process , loved the prints , but basically could not afford to keep the machine alive, it was a sad day when the scrapper came and took away a perfectly operation cibachrome processor. I ran the last standing commercial Cibachrome lab in Canada, I purchased a special built processor for this product and mastered masking and eventully printed digitally with my lambda. I believe the biggest user of this product today in a single operator situation would be Jeff Wall in Vancouver, but I do not believe he prints for anyone but himself.

The only ad that I ever saw in any magazine promoting Cibachrome in the last 17 years was a black and white lab ad featuring a print shop that was closed and the owner operator deceased.
This was not a Ilford UK issue, but rather Ilford Switzerland issue and I do agree that moving on is the right course. For those pinning for the archival aspects of cibachrome , remember that was only the case in dark storage, and with digital negatives looming and prevalent , making tri colour gums and carbons are within everyone heres reach and at a fraction of the cost.

The writing has been on the wall for a long time now regarding Ilfochrome; I am not at all surprised it is ending. Realistically, it is pointless grandstanding to suddenly feel the urge to stock up on chems, papers and whatnot and assume you can keep running the process well into the future. That's crystal ball stuff that has been tried many times before by home hobbyists. Make what you have last as long as you can, but don't get bogged down in nostalgia. Move along and transition — analogue to digital; if you do not, all you will have are slides and not a skerrick of skill to manage any processing of them in the post-analogue era, where darkrooms and wet chems had then become a nostalgic era for poignant reflection, rather than treating the coming end of it as a catalyst for change and skilling up so that you can rest assured that so long as film is available you can still make something of it rather than turn your back on photography altogether. That's not something I will be doing with my forward plans, which are analoguous photography and dproduction.

Let's not forget that Ilfochrome lost legions of dedicated analogue photographers here in Australia with the closure of the last long-term pro-level lab in Adelaide. The exodus away from analogue printing's finest was profound. Of those I know of, all shifted immediately to digital, some retired, others dropped photography, like the mournful tune of the Last Post: a life of dedication to the process wasn't enough to save it, much less a scattering of people around the globe. Time and time again labs were railed by tardiness on the other side of the globe. It's not that Switzerland cared much for deadlines, delivery etiquette, quality control or a litany of other disturbing problems that harried labs working the very expensive Ilfochrome process, such as faulty, scratched, spoilt or unsuitable media. We're probably better off without it now that other processes are getting a serious leg-up on the old bastion of prints. My 320 bespoke 'chromes over 21 years will serve as a lasting reminder of what it was like. But it's time to move on. Like all those similarily disaffected, I am still working in analogue (transparencies) using film cameras, but actively transitioning to alternative process production.

 

[Renato Tonelli]

I am not happy about it, to say the least.

I have been expecting it and I agree that the company did absolutely nothing (ZERO) to promote this unique product.

 

[Prest_400]

I am not happy about it, to say the least.

I have been expecting it and I agree that the company did absolutely nothing (ZERO) to promote this unique product.

That's true. Ilfochrome could have had more possibilities if it was marketed.

Being a process with desirable characteristics like good permanence characteristics and high saturation, it could have gone rather well.

And let's see if I'll ever able to order a print of some of my slides...

 

[Photo Engineer]

Did any one here note what Simon Galley said about the difficulty manufacturing this product? It is incredibly difficult to make and therefore as the quantity that is sold decreases, the price will go up! Mass production kept the price down and gave a reasonable profit margin.

That is no longer true.

PE

 

[DREW WILEY]

Ciba processing in terms of big lab usage was really tough per maint expense and worker health.
Now that the medium has itself gotten to be about twice the price as in its heyday, this has been
inevitable. Think I'll only do one more run of it myself. Hopefully Fuji CA Supergloss will remain avail
as a competitive look, though the latest version of it is only avail here in 32" wide rolls - a minor
annoyance. One can still use the same process drums etc as for Ciba, and this is an easier less
expensive alternative. I don't regard the blaaaaah look of digital as a suitable alternative at all.

 

[Poisson Du Jour]

Did any one here note what Simon Galley said about the difficulty manufacturing this product? It is incredibly difficult to make and therefore as the quantity that is sold decreases, the price will go up! Mass production kept the price down and gave a reasonable profit margin.

That is no longer true.

PE

Quite true, and a well-known fact. But even in "mass production" price rises were irritatingly frequent — it was a major two-way gripe at the lab I had a long-term printing relationship with. The other was poor quality control: scratches, crimps, stains etc. A lot of the time the raw product wasn't like a Genevé watch in its glittering flawless beauty! Besides which, frequently pushing the price up only served to grate against and eventually alienate photographers and labs. Labs with all their myriad overheads cannot absorb the increases (certainly not in the range of 20 to 30%) and are loathe to pass them on to customers. Essentially Switzerland burnt its bridge at both ends.