I probably first became aware of Cibachrome in the late 1980s. My brother managed a color lab (Jackson's in Flagstaff AZ) and he raved over the quality of color particularly when printed from a Kodachrome transparency. I hadn't really thought about it much until sometime after I myself got into film photography in 2009.
Readers of my blog will know that I have been trying old B&W photographic papers along with contemporary versions; as I improve my skills I am also interested in some of the history and past experiences in the subject. I suppose this 'retro' angle is something I have always enjoyed. I spent many years building furniture and would build it only with traditional joinery. I enjoyed that connection with the past even as I often used power tools to save time and effort. Never-the-less I often took on parts of or whole projects using only hand tools. In photography alternative processes hold a similar interest for me but I have not taken them up yet.
While perusing eBay I noticed some Cibachrome filters were available and researching that they might be useful for color prints I bought them quite cheaply. Later I started to notice Cibachrome paper was available and bought a pack of 5x7; again for a reasonable price. A couple of packs of unopened 12x16 packs followed and an 8x10 processing drum. Meanwhile I researched the chemistry having seen none available online.
Cibachrome was developed in the 1960s by Ciba Geigy based on a process first described by Dr. Bela Gaspar. It was unique for color prints as it relies on a dye destruction technique rather than color couplers that bind pigments to to the silver. I found a good description
here. It is also unique in that it takes a positive transparency (color reversal) and creates a positive image. This has an interesting implication in the darkroom. It is also highly archival. It uses Azo dyes and is estimated to last 200 years in the correct humidity conditions. There are anecdotal reports of photos is shop windows exposed to sunlight that have lasted without fading for years. Cibachrome eventually was part of Ilford and by 2012 the digital revolution had caused them to cease production. Always expensive it served a niche in art photography. There are still a few places that offer Cibachrome having bought material to last a number of years. The prices are high but not inaccessible for that special print.
Before I found the proper Cibachrome P30 chemistry online my investigations did turn up alternative 'homebrew' versions for Cibachrome from the
Colour Reversal Club website. This is alternative DIY chemistry. Just follow the series of links at the bottom of each page. I imagine after my first batch is done I will find myself mixing these to use on the remainder of my paper. (
Update: I did eventually try the permanganate bleach but could not get any kind of image.)
A good article on processing Cibachrome I found
here on Luminous Landscape. This gives a step by step overvew of the processing of a print. As to the chemistry I did find someone selling an original 1 liter P30 kit (1/2 of a P30 kit I believe as they were sold as 2x 1 liter kits). This seemed easier and would eliminate a variable for a first-timer like me.
The kit consists of 4 foil pouches Developer, 2 part Bleach A&B, and Fixer all as powders. The developer powder was lumpy and took a while to dissolve completely. Part A bleach had absorbed moisture and so took some effort to remove the resulting paste from its pouch. The Fixer was like a brick and had to be bashed to break into small chunks to fit into the bottle. All of this confirmed for me the stuff was old, and might be compromised.
Now with a liter of each Developer, Bleach, and Fixer the process is fairly simple. The developer is nothing more than a normal B&W developer with some silver solvent (really just a small amount of fixer). Here the exposed silver is developed in each dye layer. The next step of bleaching then uses these exposed grains to destroy the dye in the vicinity of the exposed grains. Fixing then removes the rest of the silver.
Because the process of coating the paper for each color layer is subject to variation each paper pack has a CMY table showing the filtration correction required to make a neutral print. Further reading shows that each enlarger has its own bias from the ideal 3200K color temperature. I have a condenser enlarger for B&W so must use below the lens filtration. It likely will make for a more contrasty print on what is supposed to be already contrasty paper.
I used my 5x7 paper first. This paper came in an unopened foil package but did not have the cardboard packaging with the filtration label on it. In any case everything is so out of date I am not sure it would help. I should also note I have never done any color printing before.
I selected my slide on the basis it was low contrast as I had heard how difficult it was to control contrast in Cibachrome with lots of mention of contrast masks. The one I chose is a simple photo of some flowers against a rendered wall.
 |
| Original Slide (Velvia) |
With the print cropped and focused in the frame it was unusual to see a color positive image in the printing frame. I had read some posts on various forums that indicated the paper was very slow so I opted to leave the aperture wide open on my first test strip. I would run my usual 8 seconds to 64 seconds in 1/2 stop intervals. In complete darkness (necessary because the paper is of course panchromatic) I placed my first sheet of paper in the frame and started the exposure. After it was complete I moved the paper to the processing drum and sealed it. Now the lights could come on. This total darkness wasn't so bad as the drum is like processing negatives in broad daylight.
For the processing I measured out 150ml of water and placed it in the tank and agitated it (by rolling on the counter-top) for about 30 seconds the recommended pre-soak then emptied the drum. Next I measure out 50ml (75ml is recommended for 8x10) of developer and put it into the upright drum. The drum has a clever design where it holds the poured chemicals in a small cup inside so it does not contact the paper. This means the development doesn't start until the drum is turned on its side. Small amounts of developer are used as it is a single use method here. The temperature of the room and chemicals was 21C which is in the band of 4 minutes for each step according to the original instructions. After 4 minutes I poured the developer out and added water again and agitated this for 30 seconds (I think this is a water stop bath). I then emptied this out and added the bleach for another 4 minutes followed by fixer for four minutes again. The moment of truth, open the drum and start the rinse (4 minutes again). here is what I got...
 |
| test print f4.5 no filtration 8-64 seconds right to left |
My instinct was to go for longer developing times but I took a step back and re-read Luminous Landscapes again. Fortunately I did as I was reminded that a positive process like this is of course reverse of black and white. Counter-intuitively it wants less exposure to darken the image. This was confirmed in holding the print under the enlarger and thinking again how the exposure was made.
So I need to stop down more. This time f8 and looking at the border it is purple and not black. Some of the shadows in the render look purple as well so I add yellow (y+.30) to combat this. The Ilford filter set has Cyan, Magenta, and Yellow filters in increments of .05 to .50. Greater values are created by stacking the filters of the same color.
 |
| test print f8 y+.30 8-64 seconds right to left |
Better but still very light. So another test print at f11 this time with more yellow (+.70)
 |
| test print f11 y+.70 8-64 seconds right to left |
Much better. Lots to take in here for my first color print. Firstly the color moves from yellow on the left ot purple on the right. So exposure and color seem to be linked which complicates things. Start at 8" on the right 22" or 32 " in the middle look ideal. 32" is more yellow than the darker 22".
In my next print I got the idea I needed more green (yellow+cyan). This was based on the assumption (misguided I think) that I needed more green to compensate for the magenta on the right. As I say I think this was wrong looking at the result.
 |
| Print f11 22 sec y+0.30 c+0.20 |
This looked like it was going the wrong direction.
 |
| Print f11 32 sec y+0.80 |
Much better more exposure for darker and more yellow.
 |
| Print f11 22 sec y+0.90 |
Another version with less exposure (lighter) but more yellow. Take your pick they are both close. Not as saturated as the original though. Less contrast I think. I have no experience with color though so there is probably much I am missing.
Rereading some of the links I also was reminded to use an ultraviolet filter which is in the set but I forgot to use. That may result in another print to test that out.
Cibachrome Batch 2
I tried another batch of paper. It is CPSA.1K Cibachrome IIA 12x16 paper. The paper seems to be too old or not kept well. Despite being in an unopened package I can manage only the ghostliest cyan image from it at different exposures.
Cibachrome Batch 3
Next was batch of 8x10 paper with an expiry date of 1985. Cibachrome-A II CPSA.1K (white opaque polyester base). I made the usual test prints based on another negative from my brother's collection. This is from Lake Powell in Northern Arizona. The scan is from an Ektachrome 100 slide made in the 1980s probably so a contemporary of this paper.
 |
| Lake Powell Moon-rise Ektachrome slide |
The first step was a test print using just the UV filter.
 |
| test print f4.5 no filter |
What is noticeable is the edges which are very light cyan and bleed well into the image. I supposed this to be due to some oxidation from the edge of the paper. The paper was sealed in its original foil pack. Still I proceeded and learned what I could. There is a lot of what I would call magenta in the image and so I thought to add some yellow.
 |
| print f4.5 32 sec y+.40 |
The above result really surprised me and shook my confidence. What went wrong? I processed exactly as I had before. Perhaps a bad sheet of paper? Is it all variable and hence useless? So I took a step back and made a new test print but added yellow to see the effect.
 |
| test print f4.5 y+.30 |
The second test print came back to normal so I could proceed. I needed more yellow as I was trying to get the orange warm tones on the rocks.
 |
| print f4.5 32 sec y+.70 |
This is heading in the right direction so I added more yellow.
 |
| print f4.5 32 sec y+1.20 |
Closer still with the above but a long way off. I am not sure if I am gaining respect for the talent of correcting color or feeling the frustration of using expired materials of unknown provenance. I suspect mostly the latter. I decided at this point some cyan was needed. The following print I made the next morning with the last of my chemicals. I opted for adding 0.40 cyan on top of the above yellow and stretching the exposure 1/2 stop to 45 seconds to compensate for all the filtration I am adding.
 |
| print f4.5 45 sec y+1.20 c+0.40 |
Funny this last one. I don't know where the brownish streaks came from. Perhaps being the dregs in the bottom of the bottle. The color is more neutral but the print is less exposed which is curious as I exposed it more. This might be the result of the last of the chemicals that had oxidized overnight perhaps. To stretch out the chemicals I had taken to using 50ml per print rather than the recommended 75ml based on some reading I had done online. Perhaps I was undone by my parsimony.
Cibachrome Batch 4
Before I made the last print above I decided to test one final batch of paper I bought. This is CRCA.44M (medium weight pearl with a paper base) with a Feb 1990 expiry date.
 |
| test print f4.5 no filter CRCA.44M |
The paper looks good. I also note it is the same type of paper used for the flowers at the beginning of the post which resolves the mystery. Since that paper was shipped in only the foil envelope I never knew the type. It appears to be CRCA.44M as well.
Conclusions
As my first foray into color old Cibachrome was perhaps not the best choice. However I did it as much for sentimental reasons as any other. Indeed I probably would not have tried to make a color print if not for this reason.
I would also say that CRCA.44M paper is probably the best at standing up to age for those inclined to try this as well.
I will probably get around to mixing my own Cibachrome chemicals next since I still have some useful paper. The bleach is the only thing I need (sulfuric acid and potassium permanganate) and this can be used in toning B&W prints as well.
As other commentators more experienced in Cibachrome than myself have commented. It is a shame there was no way to save this process. It is unique with special qualities but also seemed very difficult to manufacture.
Comments