I agree with the importance of studying Kodak's scheme, and looking at Jim Browning's website. It would be interesting to see if we could get some of EKC's information regarding the sensitometry of their dyes and perhaps the formulation of their materials. From a history perspective, it would be very useful information.

Unless of course they have plans to bring back the product........(long pause).... HAH!

I guess some of my reluctance to acknowledge these issues at the moment stems from the fact that I've yet to see what the limitations of the simplest means are. I'd like to see what can be done with the least amount of effort, and then scale up from there. That's why I'm calling this imbibition for the people; although Jim Browning has done a noble and great thing by effectively "open sourcing" his whole production method, it's still beyond the scope of 99% of the people out there. I'd like to lure people into the idea that they too can create dye-transfer prints.

I see the major steps to success as this:

1) a good matrix formula and simple means for preparing it (check); with the possible addition of a light-restraining dye.

2) a good understanding of how different sensitizing concentrations will affect the contrast of the matrix, and in turn, how the pH of the dye bath can affect the contrast of the transfer. These are 2 very important controls, and I'm imagining there's a yet-understood 'Venn diagram' involving these two variables.

3) dyes and the appropriate dye solution (buffer). That Colton & Thronson paper gives a good idea of what's needed for a dye-solution.

4) receiving paper and mordant. Much in the same manner that we prepare carbon papers from Arches watercolor paper, and the like, I'm imagining a basic formula for hobbyists to create suitable papers.