Color Dye-Transfer Prints for the Modern Hobbyist - *Imbibition for For the People!*
HISTORY of the PROCESS
In 1994 Kodak discontinued the "Kodak Dye-Transfer Process". Since that time, only those who have hoarded those materials or have been enterprising enough to manufacture their own silver-halide matrix films (Jim Browning) have been able to make dye-transfer prints.
However, this is a curious & unfortunate state of affairs! The earliest dye-transfer (or dye imbibition) prints were made by exploiting the same mechanism that modern day carbon & gum printers use; the ability of potassium or ammonium dichromate to harden gelatin upon exposure to UV light.
The 2 most common ways to a make a dye-imbibition print both rely upon a gelatin matrix.
In recent times (Kodak) the preferred method was with a silver-halide emulsion on a clear base. A negative is exposed through the base and developed in a tanning developer which hardens the gelatin in situ with the developed silver. This is then "etched" in hot water, which removes the gelatin that remains untanned (soluble) to reveal a relief image that clings to the base. This gelatin relief consists of varying depths that correspond directly the shadow density in the photograph.
The other method is very similar, but instead of using a silver-halide emulsion, a gelatin layer is sensitized with dichromates and exposed (again, through the base) under a negative and etched in hot water. It is this variable gelatin relief that absorbs dye to varying degrees, thus continuous tone is possible.
An obvious difference between these 2 methods is that the silver-halide emulsion can be exposed under an enlarger whereas the DCG (dichromated gelatin) requires an enlarged negative for contact printing. This is one important reason for the success of the silver-halide method.
However, the use of DCG matrices has many precedents, most notably the Pinatype process; outlined here in this British Journal of Photography article from 1907. However, the first application of this property that gelatin will imbibe & transfer a dye was disclosed by Charles Cros, a Frenchman, who called it the Hydrotype process in the late 1800's. Another process was Jos Pe. It should be noted that the Pinatype uses a slightly different type of matrix (one that is not etched = planographic, as opposed to relief) and correspondingly uses a different class of dyes and is exposed under positives, interestingly enough. No need to go into this in depth at the moment however....
So, to make a dye-transfer print, a relief matrix is soaked in a bath of an acid-dye, the dye imbibes (or migrates) into the gelatin relief image and this is then rolled into contact with a sheet of receiving paper. The dye transfers from the matrix to the receiving paper.
If 3 matrices are prepared from color separation negatives, and dyed in the appropriate secondary dye colors (CMY), and finally transferred in register to the receiving paper, a full color image is formed. This is the process in a nutshell.
Although my work on this technique is far from complete, I want to at least disclose and compile all the information so far gathered, so that other people who are interested may join the effort.
- PREPARING THE MATRICES
First, the modern worker needs a suitable clear support. This is found in Photo Formulary's Estar Melinex (mispelled on their website as 'melenex'). This is a thin, clear support that is subbed to accept emulsions. This subbing cannot imbibe any dye itself, which is ideal becaue otherwise you will get stained highlights. Although I have not tested any other materials, I'm curious what else might be suitable. Overhead transparency paper perhaps? Whatever the substrate is, it must be treated so that it "grabs" the gelatin, otherwise it will easily peel off. Search "corona discharge" for more on this, or APUG member hrst's work with substrates. Fortunately, there is an existing product at the moment.
The melinex scratches easily, and care should be taken to keep it as unblemished as possible. Vaseline or some kind silicon oil (PE) might be able to hide the scratches when it comes time for exposure (remember, we're exposing through the base).
As a side note, another option would be to do a "carbon transfer" of the clear relief image (or pigmented relief image for that matter) and this could become the matrix. This would eliminate the need for exposing through the base and a special substrate for the matrix.
2nd, you must coat the melinex with a gelatin layer. This is effectively no different than pouring carbon tissues (sans pigment). I have chosen 6% gelatin with 1% sorbitol, though there is nothing yet to suggest that this is superior to any other concentration, and not enough testing has been done to see what effect the gelatin composition will have upon the matrix characteristics. This gelatin solution pours nicely and makes a thin coating; this has been my only criteria so far. Each worker will probaly find their preferred way to achieve this, just like in carbon pouring.
3rd, the matrix blank must be sensitized. Having very little experience with this personally, I can only say that it will be necessary to have the back surface clean of any splotches before exposure, and also the deepest layers of the gelatin must be sensitized. It has been suggested (Vaughn) that this is not really a concern.
Fortunately, the rigid densitometric requirements of traditional dye-transfer printing can likely be thrown out the window when using DCG matrices. Traditional AgX matrix films had but one contrast grade, necessitating strict control of contrast in the sep negs. Thanks to the contrast control available from dichromate sensitization, considerable leaway should be had.
Chalk one up for DCG-imbibition!
4th, UV exposure under negatives. The ins & outs of making color separations are best left alone in this discussion, but tri-color gum printers will probably find their negatives excellent for preliminary testing. I am exploring the route of making enlarged negatives on mammography x-ray film (with an intermediate panchromatic step), which so far has proved promising.
5th, etching in hot (120°F) water, just like carbon. Due to the nature of the hardening by dichromates, control should be exercised to ensure consistency. This difficulty is eloquently (if not somewhat discouragingly) described in this post.
6th, at this point, one should probably clear (sodium sulfite?) the matrices and perhaps harden them. However, I can't recommend anything at the moment. Some hardeners, like chrome alum, might act unfavorably as mordants in the matrix, where we don't want them. Will advise.
As it stands now, obtaining appropriate dyes is the single biggest roadblock. Recently, a couple boxes of Kodak dyes came through eBay and sold for over $100 a pop. Not a sustainable solution.
Jim Browning has listed the following dyes in his PDF for Dye Transfer Materials: Acid Blue 45 (or 25; bluer and transfers slower), Acid Red 80 (or 289*), Acid Yellow 11 (or 23*) [*brighter colors at the expense of light-fastness].
J.S. Friedman, author of the monumental "History of Color Photography", lists a number of textile dyes that may be suitable for the process and I would encourage people to explore that route. Although the color demands might not be perfectly met, textile dyes are easily obtainable and might be perfectly satisfactory for the imaginative printer. These textile dyes, known as "Acid Fast", will likely work and are available very cheaply. I suspect that their light-fastness is good if they are well regarded by textile folks.
Many sellers on eBay have large quantities of dyes, usually being liquidated from old labs, etc. All dyes have multiple names, so consult a book like Sigma-Aldrich's Handbook of Stains, Dyes & Indicators (easily available from most University libraries) to find out alternate names, chemical information, lightfastness and color quality.
The best option might be to find a manufacturer that offers samples of their dyes. A sample is likely to be sufficient for many, many prints, or alternatively, you might wish to see what their minimum quantity is.
When all is said and done, availability of dyes will be the key to truly making modern-day dye-transfer a reality. I am fortunate to have a wide variety of old dyes given to me by a chemist who researches dye-transfer, in addition to synthesizing his own dyes. So, perhaps there is hope that in the future we can provide better options in this regard. In the meantime, I will use these dyes to test my materials and will be simultaneously exploring alternative dye options, such as textile dyes.
A word about dyes: acid dyes happen to have an affinity for gelatin, that is, they will stain it. This affinity is increased with lower pH (more acid), and thus the receiving paper is soaked in an acid solution to encourage the dyes to leave the matrix and transfer more completely. Logically enough, to clear the matrix after transferring, a dilute ammonia solution will liberate the dye from the gelatin. A matrix can be reused many times, another reason why this process was so successful (ultimately superceding carbro in the industry).
There have been other methods to make prints with different classes of dyes like Pinatype above, which used "Pina" dyes... a.k.a. a proprietary dye (though Friedman lists the probable candidates). Also, there have been methods to use basic dyes, which are exceptionally brilliant & pure, but are very quick to fade. Since these dyes react differently with gelatin, different materials & methods are required. See Friedman if interesetd.
But acid dyes are the preferred class because they are quite good in color, and are the most permament of dyes. Other dyes that will act in the same manner as acid dyes are "direct" and "reactive" dyes, though I am far from an expert on these matters.
For an excellent paper on the requirements & testing of dyes, please follow these links -> Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, to Dyes For Imbibition Printing by Colton & Thronson.
Any information on dye-transfer printing, such as that given by Jim Browning, or Ctein, or Kodak's publication E-80 will give you a solid idea of what is necessary for transferring the print, as this function is independant of the kind of matrix used. At the moment, this is my least studied area of the process so I'd hate to give misinformation. It is however, pretty straight forward.
Basically you soak the matrices in their respective dye baths until they reach equilibrium (that is, the time it takes to absorb all the dye that they can hold). Then, you transfer them to a dilute acetic acid bath of about 2%. This rinses the excess dye off. At this point, in the acid bath, the dye will not exit the relief, and if the 3 matrices are not registered yet, they can be visually aligned in this bath and punched. The color image will be visible at this point.
Each matrix is then rolled onto the receiving paper, one after the other. The time that it takes for the dye to exit the matrix and migrate to the receiver paper will be a function of the dye, and will likely vary (as it did in the Kodak process). Standard practice is to transfer each color twice.
Another important aspect is the receiving paper itself and the pre-treatment bath. Kodak supplied a pre-bath for the receiving paper, but at the moment I couldn't tell you exactly what is in it. It stands to reason that it would be an acidic bath, and indeed, a sloshing of vinegar (not very scientific, nor ideally probably) helped a down & dirty test succeed while testing with a food dye. See here.
So as you can see, considerable room for experimentation is present. For initial testing, fixed out photo paper will be more than sufficient and actually the hardeners present in the emulsion, or from some fixers, will act as mordants in their own right.
An idealized receiving paper will have a dedicated mordant. F.E. Ives first suggested this method in U.S. patent #1,121,187, 'Photographic Printing Process', from December 15th, 1914. Basically, the mordant increases the paper's affinity to hold onto the dye (from the French word mordere, "to bite").
F.E. Ives has many earlier patents describing the use of DCG matrices for imbibition printing. Friedman doesn't spend much ink in discussing dye-transfer matrices of this type, instead simply saying that F.E. Ive's patents on the subject can be considered the authoritative text. Indeed, I would recommend anyone interested to seek them out, and I'll be more than happy to include the patent #'s. (p.s. They are listed in Friedman, and that book is available on Google books).
So as you can see, the work is just beginning. But all the information is out there and nothing is beyond the scope of the hobbyist. It just isn't formalized as of yet, so there is a lot of original & novel work that must be done before we can start "spreading the gospel" and telling people exactly how to do it.
I hope this will encourage a few people to give it a go, and remember that if tri-color seems daunting, there's certainly nothing wrong with monochrome prints. That would greatly expand the list of possible dyes for the process.
More to come in the future...
- Chris Holmquist, holmburgers, 2011 -
Last edited by holmburgers; 05-25-2011 at 05:20 PM. Click to view previous post history.
Tartrazine has an absorption maximum of 427nm and I have a scan from the Sigma dye book somewhere around here that shows its UV absorption to be decent. It's not as good as some other candidates, but I think it'll be an improvement over no dye.
Also, the fact that it's so common and that nearly everyone has some in their kitchen cupboard is a big appeal.
If you are the big tree, we are the small axe
nice job done with the coating, Chris!
I cannot believe such an even coating could be done with a haircomb!
what was the wet thickness of the coating?
I can't say for sure to be honest. It's a 6% gelatin solution, so it's quite liquid and takes a while to set up. I think a more viscous solution would be tricky with the comb, but this kind of comb (all the same size & spacing of teeth) does quite well I've found. Like a poor man's mayer rod!
I think it's about 0.5mL per square inch when wet coating, with a little excess.
Last edited by holmburgers; 09-14-2011 at 12:11 PM. Click to view previous post history.
If you are the big tree, we are the small axe
In Ives' patent 1,121,187 he recommends the following dye baths:
Bayer's alizarin blue A S, 1 gram to 1 quart of water, with 1 gram of citric acid and 1 to 3 grams of citrate of potash. For magenta pink, equal parts of Bayer's alizarin rubinol R and rubinol 3 G, with 1 gram of citric acid and 1 to 3 grams of citrate of potash. For yellow, Bayer's sulphon yellow R, with 1 gram of citric acid and 1 to 3 grams of citrate of potash.
These dyes are cyan: CI Acid Blue 47, magenta: CI Acid Red 80 & CI Acid Red 82, yellow: CI Acid Yellow 42.
Although these dyes are probably not ideal in their hues, it will be interesting (if I can find them) to see what results Ives enjoyed.
If you are the big tree, we are the small axe
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
I made a mistake in the last post. Ives' cyan was CI Acid Blue 27, not 47. My bad!
This, as well as telling me the proper dye names to begin with, was brought to my attention by Michael Garelick.
Last edited by holmburgers; 09-23-2011 at 11:45 AM. Click to view previous post history.
I visited Rochester, NY this last week and while there made sure to check out the George Eastman House's collection. I requested to look at 2 dye-imbibition prints made by Ives. I requested these simply because I knew they existed, thanks to Gary Saretzky. -> http://gary.saretzky.com/photohistor...sky/index.html
Anyways, I saw the print shown in that link, and another portrait of a girl outside. Apparently there are many, many more and I'm sad that I didn't have time to look at them all.
Gary said that these portraits were "by Elias Goldensky made at the request of Frederic Ives using his Tripack film (3 negatives) and a Hi-Cro camera in 1916." Ives lived in Philadelphia and I would guess that he had Goldensky, a reknowned photographer in the city, demonstrate the capability of his process. I'm not sure if Ives actually made them, or if Goldensky used Ives' process. I'm gonna try to figure that out...
The prints looked quite good, but there were certainly faults. For one, sharpness was quite low, and it's hard to know if this was aesthetic or due to the process. I'd guess it to be a mixture of the two, or perhaps a soft-focus lens was used to make the best of the inherent softness of the process.
As for color, the sea-foam green "scarf" was very beautiful and vivid. The skin tones and pink flower looked quite good as well, as did the brown pillow in the background (much less cropped in the actual print) and the lady's hair. Greens however seem to suffer the most. The leaves of the flower were quite dark and drab, and greens in the other print I saw were also unsaturated like that. But, it's hard to say objectively of course since there are so many factors that go into the making of the print.
Under the mat, I could see some of the single layers of dye. The magenta appeared very red, and this fact was echoed by Mssr. Garelick, who told me that Acid Red 82 is a very reddish magenta.
If anyone has any infromation about the Hi-Cro camera, like an image of it, please let me know.
Ok, a slight amendment to these Ives images made with the HiCro camera.
On page 60 of Frank Roy Fraprie's How To Make Prints In Colors (available here on Google books) are instructions for the Hess-Ives color process.
It appears that these are not dye-imbibition prints afterall, in the sense that there's no transfer of the dye, though there is imbibition into reliefs by dye-baths, but they are on thin celluloid films that are then superimposed.
The instructions are pretty unclear, but it seems that the relief films are pre-sensitized, as there's no mention of a sensitizing step or anything. And after a hot water etch, they are put into a hypo bath, followed by clearning in a potassium ferricyanide bath, which is somewhat puzzling to me.
There are instructions and different 'tabloid' dye capsules for either transparencies or prints on paper. The transparencies would require a higher dye-content than the paper prints.
In summation, I'm somewhat confused and obviously need to learn a bit more about this HiCro camera and process.
So, did I really see dye-imbibition prints or not?!
If you are the big tree, we are the small axe
Dye-Imbibition As Art
Generally speaking, dye-imbibition printing (in the form of Kodak's Dye-Transfer or Wash-Off Relief process) has been reserved for high-end color printing in the fields of marketing & advertising, museum & gallery exhibitions/sales, or for a commercial product itself (like a Technicolor print, to be projected for profit). Very rarely have artists taken the reigns and tried to do something purely artistic with this versatile process.
One such example is Jeannette Klute who experimented with a number of dye-transfer "derivations". Check out this PDF (starting on page 5).
The process is well suited to making drastic deviations from reality. For instance, imagine how easy making false-color images would be. Simply put the matrices in the "wrong" dye-bath.
Anyone who is interesting in hand-tinting or selectively adding color to their photoraphs can do so with amazing ease. This was the fundamental goal of the old Kodak Flexichrome process where you painted the dyes onto the matrix manually. The matrix absorbs (imbibes) the dyes in proportion to exposure.
One idea that I'm particularly interested in trying is a completely non-photographic technique. Purely abstract experiements in color synthesis!
One way about this would be to expose your negatives under an enlarger and to use manual techniques of dodging and burning in order to make 3 negatives with somewhat "random" tonal gradations. Whatever method you used to create these would be up to you, but the result upon superposition would be a completely original and abstract composition in color. I imagine the most interesting results would be from mostly black or white prints with splashes and fits of color. By switching the negatives with different dye-baths, you could create the same form in an endless array of colors.
If a photographer's goal is to have a highly developed eye, in the colloquial sense of taste and style, then we'd be wise to take inspiration from the wider world of the visual arts; where depictions of reality are hardly required to make an impacting impression on a viewer.
Now, this is by no means the sole purpose of working on such a dye-printing scheme, the main impetus is of course color prints, but working under the guise of "alternative processes" can liberate the photographer from such restraints that are traditionally a burden to the "technician".
If you are the big tree, we are the small axe