Had you ever considered these options?
1. As particle size decreases, transparency goes up!
2. Metallized dye complexes are transparent. You form the "pigment" in situ by reaction with a metal salt.
Precisely, Ron. The point is, that folks making advanced pigments don't have any real incentive to make process
colors. I'm sure I could take something already available in industrial scale and turn out a reasonably balanced
carbon print, probably just as good as any pigment set currently being used, but not anywhere near the hypothetical ideal. A co-worker of mine invested in metal pigments early on, got nervous, so sold his shares off
early. He still made enought to put his kids thru college; but then the technology took off big scale and he realized he could have retired on it if he had waited another year or two! There is also for remarkable pigment
work developed in Europe. None of this has anything to do with inkjet needs. I'm talking about primary pigments,
not lakes or tiny dyed particles. The permanence potential with problems from preservatives or glycols is out
there. I just don't have any time at the moment to experiment. I need to get my inventory of more ordinary color
prints built up again before I can fool around with either dye transfer printing or something wholly experimental.
Another area where fresh thinking could begin regards actual tissue sensitization with involve neither dichromates nor diazo technique. That can be found in medical patents related to gelatin and collagen. But so
far, everything I've encountered looks either too complex or too toxic to recommend to any home darkroom worker. It would take a trained chemist with appropriate professional facilities. And absolutely none of this would
have any realistic profit potential. Nobody cares what a carbon print is nowadays other than another printmaker.
I have yet to try it but the Shiba process doesn't look to complicated and can create "three color gums" or "three color carbon tissue" without the use of dichromates. Quiet a few photographers I know would love to see a comeback of the dye transfer. Some smaller pigment mills in Europe, especially in the Czech Republic might be interested in creating a niche product.
Doninik - dye transfer matrix film has already had three custom runs in Europe. My freezer is full of the last of the Ekfe batch, and allegedly the film made in Germany is better per dust control, but that all went to one user
in Germany who exposes it via blue laser, but otherwise processes it traditionally. I'm personally working in more an advanced tweak of the older wash-off relief technique, totally analog, but so far getting very promising test results, but still haven't had time to do serious personal printing this way. The whole problem with alternative
printers is that they naturally want to experiment in all kinds of different directions, so it's quite difficult to pool
buying power into any one category. Dye transfer would be easy to revive if there were enough younger workers
willing to spend the time and money. But it does require a fair amount of elbow room if one wishes to make larger
prints. Commercially it will never compete with inkjet. You've got to want to do it for personal reason, or for the
superior look of certain specific colors. But my goal is not to replicate it but actually improve it in certain respects. I can confidently state that I've found better ways to make separation negatives than in the heyday
of the process, without even resorting to digital negs, and have also figured out better ways to develop the
matrices. Other folks are exploring ways of improving dyes and mordants.
But this jogs my memory, since Ron you are a member of the dye transfer forum too, and have the
necessary background in film science. And here the holy grail of matrice film per se would be something with a straighter toe and better highlight control, which has always been a shortcoming
of the process. I'm going to mess with developer tweaks to do this, and still have a lot of Tech Pan
8x10 on hand if old school highlight masking is still required. But rethinking the matrix film itself might
be in order. Jim's formula and Efke etc is pretty much a replication of traditional Kodak film.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
I just talked to Jim a few days ago about this. I would have to defer to Jim for posting anything he feels comfortable discussing here on the forum. My work has gone in a different direction, namely very high speed emulsions with advanced sensitization. Maybe that will be in Volume 2 of my book.
As you say, Matrix film has a very definite set of requirements. They can be compatible with ordinary films but need not be.
Adam Bartos Exhibit
The Tom Gitterman Gallery (New York) exhibition of Adam Bartos photographs will feature 9 color carbon prints made by Tod Gangler. The opening reception is Wednesday February 29th and Tod will be there - so if you are in town, here's your chance to talk shop with a master of the process.
Last edited by CMB; 02-27-2012 at 02:12 AM. Click to view previous post history.
Just found a great supplier of all things pigment. http://www.kremerpigments.com/shopus/index.php?lang=ENG
There are a LOT of interesting pigments on this website, which should appeal to anyone who's into carbon or gum printing. The nice thing is that they appear to be easily bought, that is, like internet buying should be! (not some roundabout rigmarole of requesting a quote, meeting minimum quantities, requesting a sample, etc.)
Here are the UltraStable pigments in aqueous dispersions. They can also be bought raw and as studio pigments, but this just seemed too convenient not to mention.
PB 15:3 , PR 122 , PY 184
hi, these are indeed excellent. I did my first tri-color diazostilbene carbons with them
I am quite pleased to learn that you have had some success making tri-color diazostilbene carbons. Could you share some info (or even a foto or two) on your procedures? What kind of separation negative (con-tone/half-tone - silver/inkjet) are you using?
Originally Posted by keesbran