Cibachrome

[jon_martin2]

Hi,

 

I'm just starting to investigate this process. Generally speaking,

are most pro color labs capable of producing cibachrome prints? Or is

it something one must do themselves?

 

I would also be interested in any comments or opinions anyone has

about cibachromes.

 

Thanks much,

 

 

 

Jon

[mike_earussi1]

Absolutely gorgeous, extremely expensive, very contrasty and consequently hard to do correctly (usually requires masking). Some labs do and some don't, you have to ask. If you do it yourself requires a powerful enlarger light bulb as has very poor reciprocity (basically requires an apo lens that can be used one stop down from wide open). And if you don't have at least a Jobo don't bother. Not for poor photographers, if you want to do it right.

[jon_martin2]

Aren't they though?! I visit a local museum and am entirely captivated by the color of these prints (huge as they are, haha). The resolution is great as well. Suggestions on how to go about it most effectively (economically, but correct)? Thanks.

 

-Jon

[pics]

Jon, you might want to check out Ilford's website since they supply the Ilfochrome/ Cibachrome materials. They usually have some pretty informative info on their products. I'd also like to give Cibachrome printing a try one of these days but I'm not set up for it right now. It's probably the most labor intensive of the darkroom processes but well worth the effort from what I hear.

[mike_earussi1]

Jon, what is your present darkroom setup? Also what camera and lenses do you have (no reason to spend a fortune on printing Cibachrome if you have low quality originals).

[jon_martin2]

The present setup is pretty basic. I process B&W film, and produce prints with a pretty simple enlarger. I'd like to get into color enlargements a little, but I'm not sure I'd like to do much color film processing.

 

As cameras go, I use a Nikon and/or a Hasselblad. I'm really just investigating cibachrome/ilfochromes. Thinking about considerations, trying to visiualize the process, etc. So . . . I could see what to anticipate if I went that direction; an early glimpse, if you will. As far as originals go, well . . . that's subjective, right?

 

Thanks again for your comments.

[mike_earussi1]

One of the main strengths of Cibachromes is their increased clarity over type "R" prints. This effect is further enhanced by an original that also has these same qualities. True, the content of the original image is certainly a matter of taste, but I was thinking primarily about the clarity, contrast and sharpness of the image, not it's content. It would just print up better. Same reason you would use an apo enlarger lens over a regular one, it has increased clarity and contrast, further adding to the final quality of the Cibachrome. For an enlarger you would need something like an old Bessler 23c or even better yet a 4x5 Saunders with a color head (you really need as much light output as you can get--Cibachrome's reciprocity failure really is awful). A Jobo is prefered in order to keep the temperature, and consequently the processing time, and therefore the repeatibility, consistant. I printed my first Cibas using a simple Besslar motor base and drum and a 67c enlarger with an old 80mm componon from Rollie originals, but was getting variable results and nightmare color correction problems primarily due to the weak enlarger bulb as well as having to stop the old lens down to f8 for corner sharpness, hence my statement about horrible reciprocity failure--I experienced it directly and it drove me crazy. Hope this helps clarify my eariler statement.

[chris haake]

Where's Scott Eaton when you need him?`

[neil_grant]

We printed cibachromes for many years using a Durst 6x9 colour enlarger - cant remember

model no - processing was in an Ilford CAP 40? and when demand increased a larger

Meteor-Siegen roller transport processor, with rudimentary replenishment. Our exposure

times were tolerable - but Ciba is always slow because of the dyes present at exposure.

Main problem with the process, as an earlier post hints, was the contrast. You just cant

reproduce the the full range of colours and contast of your original slide. Second problem

was the smell - from time to time chemical spills do happen and when the fixer reacts with

the bleach SO2 gas is produced. For us, scanning and Fuji Pictography killed it off.

[discpad]

For a good treatise on printing Ilfochrome Classic (formerly called Cibachrome until c.1993) see "Contrast masking for Ilfochrome printing" at http://www.lightroom.com/lr_pages/masking.html

 

Also important is the transparency film you shot with, and whether you push or pull processed it. For example, old-time printers suggest shooting Kodachrome 64 at EI 50 and processing normally if you plan on Ilfochrome printing to reduce the contrast of the original, in lieu of using a contrast mask.

 

Along these same lines, shooting with the low contrast Fuji Astia is also a Good Thing.

 

Cheers! Dan

[bman0023]

Very interesting, are there any pro labs that will print a Cibachrome these days? I would love to see what some of my slides look like in comparison to a digital print.

 

Thanks,

Brad

[discpad]

Uhh, The Light Room? http://www.lightroom.com/lr_pages/ilfochrome.html

[rowland_mowrey]

If you want to make a garbage dump look like paradise, then use Cibachrome. The color contrast and overall imaging enhances color to the extent that everything is very high contrast.

 

Don't get me wrong, the prints are beautiful, but are highly exaggerated representations of the originals.

 

Ron Mowrey

[John Crowe]

The professionally made Cibachromes that I have from Kodachrome 64 and Velvia 50 are incredible and represent the slides in the best possible way without going the display transparency and backlit route. From a Cibachrome class that I took many years ago I can tell you that it is a difficult process, not only in the exposure but nailing the colours right. I know in my metropolitan area there are two companies that do it.

 

 

The two best printing options these days appear to be slide to Cibachrome or DSLR digital file to Lightjet. I believe price to be similar between the two. The Lightjet gets expensive for slides since you have to pay for the super quality scan.

[geoff_samuel]

I was actually recently looking at some Cibachromes I printed about ten years ago and was blown away by how good they looked. They have a really unique look, sure a bit contrasty but that's not always a bad thing. I made them with a pretty crappy LPL enlarger, and processed them in a drum, used a bucket of water for temp control. Primitive setup but it worked adequately as long as you were consistent. Does get very expensive though which is why I stopped doing them.

[discpad]

Ron wrote "If you want to make a garbage dump look like paradise, then use Cibachrome. The color contrast and overall imaging enhances color to the extent that everything is very high contrast."

 

But Ron: There are some subjects where the film can't capture the contrast to begin with, so the exaggeration actually gets the print back closer to the original. Think the fluorescent red-cerise in the Marlboro-Penske IndyCars. Or, the orange in the NASCAR "Tide Ride." Or, many other vividly-painted race cars on any given weekend at your local track.

 

Ilfochrome Classic is a *tool* and the trick is to use the right tool for the job. In the camera portion, this is film selection and film/digital selection.

 

Cheers! Dan

[w_byrn]

Jon I am fortunate to have access to Frank Green of The Lab Ciba for my printing.Frank has been printing for over 30 years and we still have to do a number of tests before we arrive at the color correct image.It is worth it.Frank also prints b&w positives for me.David Wood owner/operator of Denvers' DR5 lab processes my 8x10 Efke 25 and 100 asa films to positives for this.I was looking at some Efke 25 positives with Frank last night and we decided that rating the Efke 25 at 20 and having David process it at 25 might give us a better exposure to print Ilfochrome Classic with.I shoot sheet film and expose for the highlight or pick a mid tone and expose it for middle grey if I like where the shadow and highlight fall.I also expose both sheets in the same film holder identically and have dr5 do a judge and run process.That is; process one sheet of film in the holder first and if adjustments need to be made ( push or pull )then make them on the second sheet.It gives the color chromes a wonderful translucent look to the reds,oranges and yellows.I shoot a lot of Colorado Plateau subject matter and also lots of fall leaves. It seems complimentary to the Cibachrome/Ilfochrome Classic method.

I have a 60 x50 matte finished image in my place that was captured originally on 35 mm and it has a wonderful Impressionistic look.

I find it to be a very exciting medium that captures and communicates the power of my landscape images the best.Some people say you can almost get ten tonal gradiants with black and white silver prints.Color I have heard rated at the eight range and chrome color at seven or less so something that can enhance that small a tonal range is appealing to me. Walt Byrnes

[brian_n._duram]

All the pro labs in our town have closed or have thrown away their Cibachrome equipment. A close alternative is Kodak's Metallic RA-4 paper. A bit expensive, but the chemistry is a lot less harmful!

 

Cre8iv1

[rainer_nagel]

looks like you better learn to do it yourself... if you have time for fine art printing

 

1.) I did some dark room printing myself (of a wedding, A4 sized prints), maybe 10y ago (student/University lab in Zurich)? In 35mm, using Fuiji Astia [RAP]. My conclusion was:

that contrast masking is really needed and that I would prefer 6x6 sized slides to do it.

 

2.) some years later, for a customer I ordered a comparison shot from a Kodachrome 25 slide (shot with Canon EF 1.2/85mm L) main results:

-color dark blue suits color was better in the digi print

 

+Cibachrome/ Ilfochrome was a little bit sharper (one could read their names on the button/name tag)

 

+white skin tones were equally good

 

3.) in Switzerland there is one pro lab left which does it from either analog (slide film) or from data files:

www.stutzfoto.ch

Stutz Foto Color Technik AG. Oberebenestr. 21 Postfach CH-5620 Bremgarten

 

They told me in 2005 that the "paper" has changed and have recommended a high saturation film (Fuji velvia Series)

 

4.) www.lightroom.com in Berkeley, CA 94710 USA will close down this service (as of 2006):

We are now in the process of closing down the Ilfochrome lab. We won't take in any more orders until we finish those we have and see how much, if any, materials are left.

 

5.) I don't know how long Ilford will survive as a company ...?

 

I really love Ilfochrome.

--rainer Nagel

[hjoseph7]

I have a question concerning Cibachrome/ilfochrome prints. It seems the entire world including the little old lady down the street agree that they are very contrasty. Then why has this process been in production for the past 30 years ? I have the vaguest suspicion that the people who complain about the high contrast dont know exactly what they are doing. I mean I read somewhere that there are easy methods to reduce the contrast such as choosing the right paper or slide. I could be wrong since I haven't tried printing cibachrome yet. Any thoughts ??

[w_byrn]

Harry;

As with all my positive film exposures I expose for the highlight. In my original capture I wait at sunset till the light level lowers the contrast to proper levels.I use a spot meter to moniter contrast or shoot sunrise shots for proper contrast spreads.Partial shade also works in some locations too.Using a graduated N.D. filter to hold back areas to hot i.e. the sand at the beach, or the sky,or snow, all can contain the contrast to where a nice positive to print Ilfochrome Classic with is obtained.Leaving out the sky helps a lot for proper tonal range.In red rock canyon country I'll shoot the canyon wall in the shade using the reflected light from the ( hot )wall in the sun.

Early and late sun light contains a higher percentage of red light because these rays are longer and this works well with this process I believe.I always try and use an ultra violet filter when working in higher elevations or the skys seem to get too blue.The lowest elevations in Utah and Wyoming are above 3,000 feet. walt

[discpad]

Hi Walt!

 

It's nice to be able to wait several hours until the light is "just right," but many of us don't quite have that luxury... In fact, sometimes I just have a fraction of a second to snap the shot! :)

[w_byrn]

I usually set up a little before sunrise or sunset and it all happens pretty fast.I don't think I have ever waited an hour for a shot.No more time than it would take to say maybe park my car at a large speedway,put in my earplugs, and schlep all my gear inside and climb to the top of the stadium and make some exposures and repack my gear and return to my car in the parking lot.

I have spent a day backpacking into a spot for a shot,overnighted and packed out the next day though.

Did I ever tell you the one about the 170'ramp on a 30 degree slope at 7,000 elavation that seven of us worked on for two weeks of ten hour days for 4 seconds of screen time that they couldn't use because it snowed?

[discpad]

Hi Walt!

 

The worst part of shooting a race is getting up early to get to the track: At Indy, I like to get there at 6AM; while others like Kentucky 7AM... Else I get hosed in traffic jams.

 

For open wheel, I use the time to shoot in the paddock & garages, as well as chatting it up with acquaintences in the racing community, and snapping candids of the drivers & owners. For an example, see the photo on page 5 at: http://www.racefax.com/content/features/02NDPole.pdf (free registration required)

 

Cheers! Dan

[hjoseph7]

"Leaving out the sky helps a lot for proper tonal range."

 

Wow that was some good advice. I plan to use the cibachrome process for contemplative nature and landscape photography. Therefore I dont mind taking my time and waiting for the light to get just right. I have a spot meter on my camera as well as a hand held spotmeter which might help me with the range in a scene. I recently purchased a ND filter, but maybe I better start thinking about a graduated filter because I like a little bit of sky and clouds in most of my shots. Thanks