Re: Gum dichromate issue

It sounds to me that when Kodak found out that thru digital computers
anybody could get their color negatives broken on the basics three forms
then they gave up.
Look at the Fresson family (Theodore-Henri Fresson) holding with their
carbon color process since 18th century.
It's like we had being eating "hot dogs" and they had the "filet mignons"
for a while.
Giovanni.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Knoppow" <dickburk@ix.netcom.com>
To: <alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca>
Sent: Sunday, August 08, 2004 12:14 AM
Subject: Re: Gum dichromate issue

>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Etienne Garbaux" <photographeur@softhome.net>
> To: <alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca>
> Sent: Saturday, August 07, 2004 8:11 PM
> Subject: Re: Gum dichromate issue
>
>
> > Giovanni wrote:
> >
> > > Has anybody used dye transfer technique in a darkroom?
> >
> > I have.
> >
> > > Can I say that this process is a cousin of gum
> dichromate print?
> >
> > It depends on how distant a cousin you mean. I'd call them
> third cousins at
> > best. Dye transfer is based on the hardening of gelatin
> by certain organic
> > developing agents. You expose matrix film through its
> base so that the
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > most-exposed layers are against the base rather than at
> the emulsion
> > surface.
> > etienne
> >
>
> Another reason for this is so that the transferred image
> faces the right way. Otherwise it would be reversed right to
> left.
> Kodak also made panchromatic matrix film so that the
> separations could be done directly using filters. This is
> advantageous when printing from color negatives where it
> saves a generation in making separation negatives.
> It is a frustration that Kodak has discontinued the
> materials for DT.
> BTW, the original Technicolor printing process was a
> variation of dye transfer. They have tried to resurect this
> recently.
>
> ---
> Richard Knoppow
> Los Angeles, CA, USA
> dickburk@ix.netcom.com
>
>
>
>
>
Received on Mon Aug 9 12:18:50 2004