Re: 4-color carbon question

David E. Le Vine - TreeO (david@treeo.com)
Sat, 9 Dec 1995 19:59:25 -0500

>>>> I am working in 4-color carbon and am having trouble with the black (final
>>>> transfer of a "single transfer" process) adhering to the magenta,
>>>> particularly in the maximum density areas. It starts to wash off in clumps
>>>> about half way through the washout. I can stop it by cutting the wash
>>>> short. Is the gelatin of the black swelling too much, or is the Dmax
>
>Do you pre-wet the black before attempting the final transfer onto your
>magenta?
>

Yes, the black is assembled under water (52 degrees F). It is immersed for
60 seconds.

>What about the three color image with the magenta on top of it? How long do
>you pre-wet and at what temp?

The receiver with the 3-color image on Melinex is immersed 30 sec. before
the pigment sheet for a total of 1.5 minutes.

>>>> magenta inhibiting adhesion?
>
>Note that overexposure of the black can also be the cause of your problem.
>Also, make sure there is no extra hardening (in a chemical hardener, e.g.,
>chrome alum) between transfers.
>

No hardening is done. The black only reaches a Dmax of 1.4 to 1.6, I don't
feel it overexposed.

>
>>We are doing true continuous tone carbon prints. Do you think anyone cares?
>
>I think what David is referring to here is the fact that some people have a
>problem using a process that uses a *screen* as the resulting print is
>considered not an original photograph but a photomechanical reproduction.
>They feel less money can be asked from a print from a halftone as it is
>more or less a "poster" instead of being an actual photograph. The fact
>that the screen in invisible to the naked eye (you need a good magnifying
>glass to see it) does not make them change their mind.
>
>Those who have the problem I described above would "care" about a
>continuous tone process. I am not aware of a survey that would indicate
>just how many people are bothered by the invisible presence of a halftone.

I wish I knew. It definitely effects the way you market such a product.

>
>I have received A LOT more complaints from people (photographers, curators,
>collectors) who feel that the newer processes may be permanent and
>saturated but, thanks to their use of a polyester base, they look like the
>laminated placemats one sees at McDonalds restaurants... This description
>is usually followed by a "yuk"... A lot of people rejected Cibachromes for
>the same reason.

The Melinex base was selected for permanence and dimensional stability, as
you probably know. Our prints, however, do not look like placemats. With
me, it's more of a tactile thing, plus I prefer paper for the historical
trueness to the process.
>
>Some people say the newer techniques can be used on real paper but when I
>ask to see them, for some strange reason, I never get a reply. Go figure. I
>have also never seen a continuous tone print made from materials designed
>for screen reproduction.
>
>Luis Nadeau
>awef6t@mi.net
>nadeaul@nbnet.nb.ca
>http://www.primenet.com/~dbarto/lnadeau.html#A0

I have not had time or "permission" to pursue the use of paper because of
the coating and additional handling required. I look forward to developing
it in that direction in the future.

The material makes excellent contone carbon prints without all the surface
reflectance differentials a halftone process creates when coupled with
relief. I will hopefully be able to supply you with a sample for a
critique. Until recently, we were not happy with the highlight tone
reproduction, but we are now!

David E. Le Vine
david@TreeO.com
http://www.TreeO.com