Processing Fuji Crystal Archive

Discussion in 'Color: Film, Paper, and Chemistry' started by Alden, Jan 25, 2008.

  1. Alden

    Alden Member

    Messages:
    313
    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2007
    Location:
    Wyoming
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    What chemicals are required to process Fuji Crystal Archive paper, and is it possible to tray process?
     
  2. Nick Zentena

    Nick Zentena Member

    Messages:
    4,677
    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2004
    Location:
    Italia
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    The RA-4 paper? It requires RA-4 chemicals -)

    PE has posted about tray processing RA-4 a few times. A search should turn up his method.

    Personally I don't like BLIX so I use a drum.
     
  3. srs5694

    srs5694 Member

    Messages:
    2,725
    Joined:
    May 18, 2005
    Location:
    Woonsocket,
    Shooter:
    35mm
    To elaborate a bit: Several companies make RA-4 chemicals. Kodak sells these chemicals in separate packages for the RA-4 developer and blix, with several variants for each depending on intended purpose (minilab, etc.). You can find these at (for instance) Adorama or B&H. The multiple options for similar-sounding products can be confusing to a newbie. If you're willing to dig on Kodak's Web site you can find descriptions of the differences between the products. Fuji also offers RA-4 chemistry, but it's a little less widely available. Third parties, such as Tetenal and Silver Pixel, also make RA-4 chemistry. B&H sells Tetenal, and Freestyle sells a few other brands. These sometimes come in kits for home darkroom use, which can be less confusing for newbies to buy, but the small-capacity kits tend to be more expensive than buying Kodak or Fuji components.

    As Nick says, PE has posted before about tray processing. I also do tray processing; I find it's faster and less frustrating than using drums, but of course this is a personal preference issue. I use developer, stop bath (I use ordinary B&W stop bath), and blix trays, so the mechanical steps are just like those of B&W print developing, just done in the dark. To do this at room temperature requires either longer development times (around 3 minutes) or a developer that's been designed or adjusted to work faster at room temperature. I use a mix-it-yourself formula with an optional bit of potassium hydroxide to speed up its operation at room temperature. Obviously, when developing in the dark you need to do everything by feel. I know where things are in my darkroom and use a timer that I can operate by feel for the developer. After putting the print in the blix I turn on the lights.
     
  4. Neal

    Neal Subscriber

    Messages:
    1,626
    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Wes
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Dear Alden,

    Do a search using the keywords RA-4 and tray. You will find a wealth of information.

    Neal Wydra
     
  5. Alden

    Alden Member

    Messages:
    313
    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2007
    Location:
    Wyoming
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Thank You all for your help.
     
  6. Richard Harris

    Richard Harris Member

    Messages:
    123
    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2007
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    I am currently using Agfa RA4 chemicals from A & O imaging (I think, can't find the invoice) My local Kodak minilab advised me that he thought Agfa chemicals ran cleaner than Kodak in his machines when he had used them in the past. Of course Agfa is not the same company anymore but I suspect the formula is the same. I am in the UK so don't know what the supply situation is wherever you are.
     
  7. PHOTOTONE

    PHOTOTONE Member

    Messages:
    2,411
    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2006
    Location:
    Van Buren, A
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    I have also found that the Agfa (brand) of RA-4 equivalent chemicals (well the developer, anyway) does run cleaner in my tabletop Nutek RA-4 processor, and seems to have a bit longer tank life, also.
     
  8. Photo Engineer

    Photo Engineer Subscriber

    Messages:
    25,885
    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2005
    Location:
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Fuji has insisted that the CA II paper requires a new version of RA chemistry for processing.

    I have not looked into this, nor have I done room temperature processing with any Fuji papers. I have had friends try using Fuji CA paper in the reverse process (Cross Process) for Endura and they report that not all emulsion numbers of Fuji CA paper will process to yield a reversal image.

    I might add that Supra III will not cross process either.

    So, there are differences between CA, CA II and Endura. I suspect this projects into any radical change you might subject these papers to, but I have not personally tested all possible conditions.

    PE
     
  9. Richard Harris

    Richard Harris Member

    Messages:
    123
    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2007
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Don't know what version of Crystal Archive I am using but it says new on the box and has no red on the label, unlike the old MP paper. It processes good in Agfa.
    PS. I don't think fuji paper is as easy to use as Kodak and I would not personally use it if I had not started with it when my Konica supply dried up. Now all my analyser channels are set up for it and I can't stomach the thought of all that trialling. That's another thread though I guess.
     
  10. bob100684

    bob100684 Member

    Messages:
    509
    Joined:
    May 8, 2006
    Shooter:
    35mm
    We're still running the new CAII through our old SFA with the exact same chemicals as when we ran CAI. There was a major change in the color balance though between the two versions.
     
  11. Photo Engineer

    Photo Engineer Subscriber

    Messages:
    25,885
    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2005
    Location:
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Bob;

    There were a number of comments on this change. Maybe you eliminate the change when you use the CAII process, IDK.

    PE
     
  12. bob100684

    bob100684 Member

    Messages:
    509
    Joined:
    May 8, 2006
    Shooter:
    35mm
    CAII is definitly changed, initial auto set ups and upkeep prints came out quite magenta. Having never used a color darkroom, and fuji's user manual not really explaining exactly what each one does, I can only assume they automatically change the baseline filtration used for printing on a particular roll of paper. FWIW, between two batches of paper, the most upkeep prints I've needed to run has been 3 or 4. When initially changing to CAII, we had to run well over 10 and if memory serves me it's somewhere in the 20's.
     
  13. fatboy22

    fatboy22 Subscriber

    Messages:
    350
    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2005
    Location:
    Iowa City, I
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I recently processed in trays using PE's method , 68 degrees using the Fuji Crystal archive paper it worked very well.
    I ran Kodak RT chemistry. I have a roller transport machine that will do 20 inch prints but perfer this method when doing small prints because I do not have to mix up that much chemistry. I only mixed up a one liter batch of the developer and bleach and was able to run quite a few prints. I was very impressed! I used a stop bath between developer and bleach. I used the developer with out adding starter. I have a Kodak #13 safe light that is very dim, but provides enough light when your eyes adjust. It does not fog the paper. I keep one hand dry and the other I wear a Nitrile glove to flip the print around in the chemistry. This is an excellent way to print color and not have to print all day like I do when I fire up the roller transport processor. I have a low volume Mohr Pro processor, it is very well built and does a fine job.