dye transfer like colors via inkjet?

[einolu]

i was talking to someone about eggelston and his dye transfer prints and the kind of colors he was able to get (that even come across on the web if you take a look at http://www.egglestontrust.com/) and i was wondering how he got this look. is it something that could be done with curves or some other kind of adjustement? i see similar colors on a bunch of websites of fine art photographers and have never been able to replicate it. any tips?

[memphis]

i second the question -- is it possible to duplicate the feel of dye transfer using photoshop?
could we create an action for our digital workflow?

[einolu]

i heard that the prints on display in london a couple years back for an eggleston show were actually inkjet prints, and like i said, i have seen this kind of 'look' a lot online, so there should be some way to do it... hope we have someone smart around here, heh ;)

[memphis]

verified that he has been using some high end inkjets recently --- he's an interesting character ---

[einolu]

early morning bump

[Finder]

Why imitate a process. Why not just use the process you have now and get what you want.

I would say, having rolled dye-transfer prints, you are not going to duplicate it.

[einolu]

seriously?

because it's an interesting experiment... much like the rest of photography, try something new, find something you like, incorporate it into your own work. if i 'stuck to my process' without ever trying to learn something new i would still be using a point and shoot without even knowing what dof or iso means.

[memphis]

Why imitate a process. Why not just use the process you have now and get what you want.

I would say, having rolled dye-transfer prints, you are not going to duplicate it.


more specifically, the chemicals for the process have been discontinued, Bill E. has a huge stockpile of the proper chemistry -

dye transfer is also expensive, prohibitively so in many cases.

Also, many of us do not have the luxury of our own private color darkroom facilities where we can experiment with this process...

Also, very few of us have the ability to do our own c41 process / printing, therefore, it falls on digital post process

[Finder]

I guess we are looking at your question two different ways.

If it is a look you want, then you can do it. Simply master whatever process you have. It is not that difficult, it just takes time and effort. Can you get what you want, that is up to you. There is no magic to it. It is a matter of controlling contrast, color, and saturation in shooting and processing. There are many ways to get there, which makes giving an answer rather difficult.

If you are trying to make injet dye-transfer prints, then I would not waste my time. The qualities of a process are inherent in a process.

[Finder]

more specifically, the chemicals for the process have been discontinued, Bill E. has a huge stockpile of the proper chemistry -

dye transfer is also expensive, prohibitively so in many cases.

Also, many of us do not have the luxury of our own private color darkroom facilities where we can experiment with this process...

Also, very few of us have the ability to do our own c41 process / printing, therefore, it falls on digital post process

Which is why I said to forget about trying to imitate dye transfer and use what you have. If you have photoshop and an inkjet printer learn how to control the process to get a look you want.

BTW, and more importantly, the matrix film has been discontinued. The chemistry is not that special.

[memphis]

i really don't want bill's look, something about the punchy colors and saturations grab me ---- kinda like velvia on steroids

i agree -- computer toned prints don't stand up to the real hand toned prints

[mfogiel]

I believe you should find this review of relevance to your question:

http://luminous-landscape.com/reviews/printers/Surface2.shtml

BTW, has anybody here tried the new HARMAN baryta papers yet?

[nikonhswebmaster]

I have two of my color dye transfer (Cibachromes) hanging in my bedroom, which are 24x32 and frankly I have never seen anything close to them out of any of my many printers.

They were made from 35mm positives, using 4x5 inter-negatives, by Duggal in New York City, about 20 years ago. They show no sign of change, even though they have been in a sunny room, with a skylight, at least 1/2 of the time. I have about 25 of them around, and they all have the same transparent depth, and saturation.