• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

Which process to print these transparencies?

Elmarc

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Feb 23, 2022
Messages
227
Location
Eu
Format
Analog
Hello all,
I mainly process and print my own black and white negatives and prints in my darkroom but on occasion I work with transparencies but have yet to print any.
I recently had a client enquire about printing two of my transparencies to A1 size so I have researched the various options which are offered by the lab who processes and scans the film which is Bayeux London.
They offer 3 options:

Digital C print - Fuji crystal paper matt or gloss

Fine art Pigment Print - paper not specified

Standard pigment print - Epson and Ilford lustre or gloss.

The client is interested something that would have a look similar, or as close as realistically possible, to that of a dye transfer print.

Is there anyone who uses this workflow on a regular basis that could offer some informed opinions please?

I attach a link to the relevant page of the lab and the chosen images.


Thank you in advance.
 

Attachments

  • 767A4856-9E68-4BFE-9724-42C70DAA1C49.jpeg
    144.4 KB · Views: 125
  • A684521F-5260-4FFE-A5FE-26BA853107E5.jpeg
    156 KB · Views: 124
Elmarc said:
The client is interested something that would have a look similar, or as close as realistically possible, to that of a dye transfer print.
Click to expand...

Fine art pigment print to a baryta base paper like Hahnemühle Photo Rag Baryta will likely get you the closest to where you want to be. There's no substitute in the present inkjet printing world for the saturation of dye transfer dyes, but with an extended gamut printer (CMYKOGV) you should be able to get fairly close to the gamut. Moreover, your example images are fairly muted color-wise (not sure if that's intentional or a technical limitation of a quick web preview?), which would make things a little easier on the print process to get right.

Digital C-print is limited to RC and if you're very, very lucky they may offer something like FujiFlex, although this is in the opposite direction of where you'd want to go from a viewpoint of surface texture.

The standard pigment print is OK for a quick preview and if it gets the job done, that's fine, but I expect that it'll be done on a low-end RC paper from the brands you mention and that's not the kind of surface you would have gotten back in the day with dye transfer.

However...the main question at this point is how you would define the desired end result. What is it in a dye transfer print that your client likes (or think they like)? Then optimize for that/those parameter(s).

Elmarc said:
https://www.bayeux.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/Bayeux-price-list.pdf
Click to expand...
This lacks all relevant technical details on the printers, ink sets and media used. Also, their website doesn't seem to work.
 
Thank you Koraks for your reply and very helpful information.
I will certainly look into fine art pigments as the closest alternative.
Just out of interest, is this your personal preferred means of printing transparencies and if so, which lab do you use? I noticed that you are in Europe.

As for the muted colours, yes, I generally like the look of this graphic style in subdued or overcast light, but I think the web preview has lost some of the brilliance.

I did a small amount of research regarding the differences between the processes before posting here, but was not aware that C prints and standard pigment would be confined to RC. That is very important as my black and white work is always on fibre paper. So in broad terms, I would be looking for something that has the same attributes in feel and depth.
As for the client, I think he has viewed dye transfer prints in the past and aesthetically would like something approaching that look. That is about as much as I can tell.

As mentioned previously, this will be my first experience in printing colour. Clients who buy my black and white work do so knowing that the work has been printed by me with my particular aesthetic.
Not being able to do so in colour presents a different set of problems.
Personally, If I was to have something in colour printed for myself then I would look into the Fresson process, but I digress.
Thank you again for your thoughts and advice.
 
For c prints the only viable options at present are Fuji papers and Fuji flex. The former is an RC paper product family, the latter is a polyester base with a very "technical" appearance.

For your prints, a pigment baryta print is the obvious choice.

Elmarc said:
is this your personal preferred means of printing
Click to expand...
Not necessarily; it depends and it really doesn't matter today whether the original is a transparency, color negative or native digital. Some kind of pigment photo natura print is currently the industry standard for a fine art print and you'd have to have a pretty specific reason in mind to deviate from this.



Elmarc said:
If I was to have something in colour printed for myself then I would look into the Fresson process
Click to expand...
I'd consider color carbon as practiced by people like Katayoun Dowlatshahi, Calvin Grier and Michael Strickland. Dressing is kind of a niche and not necessarily the best spot IMO. Either way, it'll be $$$ especially if it needs to be big; for a commercial print, inkjet is a more sensible route unless your client has a very specific appreciation for a carbon print and deep pockets to match.
 
koraks said:
For your prints, a pigment baryta print is the obvious choice.
Click to expand...

This is the advice I was looking for. Thank you.

Thank you for the clarification.
I was actually referring to having something printed for myself. Fresson does not look too expensive and I am not a fan of big prints.
As it is, I am in the process of trying to persuade the client to print smaller than A1...
 
Elmarc said:
I am in the process of trying to persuade the client to print smaller than A1...
Click to expand...

That's funny; there's a recent thread about the size an image works at. For some images, printing them very big or very small just doesn't work for some reason. Is this also why you're discussing final size with your client?
 
koraks said:
I'd consider color carbon as practiced by people like Katayoun Dowlatshahi, Calvin Grier and Michael Strickland.
Click to expand...

Thank you for these references. Such beautiful work.
Much appreciated!
 
koraks said:
That's funny; there's a recent thread about the size an image works at. For some images, printing them very big or very small just doesn't work for some reason. Is this also why you're discussing final size with your client?
Click to expand...

Yes, indeed. some of my own darkroom printed images only work to my eye as 5x7's and visa versa. Personally I think that the more graphic the image the smaller the print can be. The framing (ie: size) can also play a big part in my experience
 
koraks said:
I'd consider color carbon as practiced by people like Katayoun Dowlatshahi, Calvin Grier and Michael Strickland.
Click to expand...

In the USA, I'd add Tod Gangler to this list.
 
By "fine art pigment print" I assume you mean some kind of inkjet print. Their inks are not technically pigments, but inks, variously blended from dyes, very fine pigments, and lakes (dyed inert particles). Complicated ingredients, yes; but the term "pigment print" should be reserved for true pigment layered processes like color carbon, color casein, color carbro, color Fresson etc, in order to avoid this kind of confusion, which is often touted for shady marketing purposes. I suspect most galleries or current photo labs have never even seen a treal pigment print, so basically don't know what they are talking about to begin with.

Several decades ago, the owner of one of the largest regional labs around here kept a little handmade tricolor carbon print on his own office wall to admire, which he had paid a lot for, but had no way to produce himself, despite his many employees and millions of dollars worth of equipment.

In terms of commercial workflow, inkjet printing has almost entirely replaced dye transfer due to much great ease and higher success rate,
at far lower cost. But inks are opaque and lack the transparent vibrancy of true dye transfer prints, or even chromogenic prints, and have some serious gamut issues. Dye transfer prints favor deep values; inkjet favors high values and has rather miserable black reproduction, often with uneven sheen involved in the blacks. Therefore, a lot depends on the specific image.

Depends a lot on the budget too. Do you want to spend ten dollars on a small print, or a thousand?
 
Get the images scanned and have small production proofs (sized, profiled etc.) printed on each of the types of print and media you have listed. They only need to be the smallest minimum the lab will print. Inket media has myriad choices and will have a wide variation in appearance. Glossy (RA4) on Kodak or Fuji media were my staple for a very long time; these eye-catching prints are usually framed behind non-reflective glass, otherwise they are very difficult to view. One of the best RA4 media, no longer available, was Kodak's Endura Professional metallic; the lustre off water features and the print's overall presentation was a never-fail "WOW!" when clients came to view.

Soooo, though it might cost a bit more (but is better organised on your part), having samples of various media will allow you and the client to scrutinise what it most appropriate, rather than guess. End of day, and unless the client has a budget that is unlimited, I would be leaning toward giclée proof prints (for selection) on several specialist fine art media, and then move from there.
 

Good advice and something I was recently considering. Thank you.
 

Personally I would opt for quality over size but this is for a client.
Thank you for the information. Very helpful.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register