Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,930   Posts: 1,556,867   Online: 882
      
Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 62
  1. #41

    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    New Jersey, US
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    452
    Quote Originally Posted by Photo Engineer View Post
    Read my previous post and look at the scanned Dmax values of the old and new paper.

    I've also explained the reason behind the blue color. It is there to adjust speed and to sharpen the image. It washes out. Nothing washes off! The blue color of processed paper that Red Sun is seeing is not related to the blue dye in the paper that washes out! It is probably fog of some sort.

    If you fully process a sheet of unexposed paper, and just blix a sheet of unexposed paper, then if they differ in blue color (or cyan), then it is fog. If they do not differ in color, then it is indeed retained blue dye, and this indicates some sort of defect in the paper or process.

    PE
    Well, well, well....

    There is no paper fog at all. The paper has no defect.

    The blue color of the processed paper can be washed off, washed away, or washed out, or whatever you want to say it. I tried some strips with 2 minutes RA rinse and the blue color did go away completely, as it supposed to be. The un-exposed 1/2 strips are white color, just as the previous batches.

    It is just a simple blue/cyan top coating get washed away during pre-rinse. I do not understand why people made it so complicated....
    A photo amateur
    Sinar P2/F2/Nikon F100/Bronica ETRSi/GS/Saunders 4550XLG/Jobo CPP2/CPE+/Colorline 7000

  2. #42

    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    New Jersey, US
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    452
    Quote Originally Posted by Prof_Pixel View Post
    YES - That's what I have been saying

    YES - Again, that's what I have been saying (But as PE has noted, it is possible that bad paper or processing chemicals might create fog that IS a result of the image dye forming couplers.)
    This gets funny. Where is the fog? where is the paper defect? Can you just read what I said????

    Thanks anyway. No need to repeat.... Thanks again.
    A photo amateur
    Sinar P2/F2/Nikon F100/Bronica ETRSi/GS/Saunders 4550XLG/Jobo CPP2/CPE+/Colorline 7000

  3. #43

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    544
    Quote Originally Posted by RedSun View Post
    No, no, you completely misunderstood what I was originally asking. Same with most of the people, even PE. This is funny.

    I was printing test strips, from 18% grey negative, for calibration. The strips are 1" wide, 5" long. I exposed 1/2 of the strip and left the other 1/2 un-exposed in order to get white base for comparison.

    I've done this many times and I never had problem with it. But this time, the white un-exposed 1/2 strips came out light blue. The blue color is darker near the thin edges where the strips attached to the Jobo test drums. When I washed the test strips in tap water, I could see that some of the blue color can be rubbed off with hands and running water. So clearly the strips are not washed well.

    The un-exposed paper never received light, no safelight, as PE suspected. The blue color is the coating, not actual image dye.

    Here I'm doing an experiment. I cut a strip of Fuji Super C paper. This paper has never seen chemical. Then I put the paper under faucet with drops of water. Here you can see clearly that the blue color was washed off (or washed away) by the running water. There is nothing to do with the chemicals.

    With all this, it is clearly that I should not have skipped the final rinse stage. The original blue coating was not 100% washed away.

    I know this whole thing made a fool of some body, or some people. But common sense prevails. The problem with APUG is that, people always want to teach a fool, not realizing that who the fool is

    Sry no flame here. I just do not understand why folks made it too complicated.

    Thx for the help anyway.

    Attachment 61166
    I see; though my prints were usually rubbish, I never saw anything like that when I used to make RA4 prints on Fuji papers. It's very strange. Sorry for my misinterpretation of your OP (note to self - engage brain before posting...). Thanks for posting the image, I hope you can solve your problem anyway. :-)

    Best,
    kevs
    testing...

  4. #44

    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    New Jersey, US
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    452
    Well, I thought I could get away with saving 2 minutes with a test strip. That is about 1/2 of the total processing time. So apparently sometimes it does not work.

    This is all the fun stuff with color printing, from color filter setting, density measure to test strips, drying the drums etc... This is also why not many folks still do RA-4 work....
    A photo amateur
    Sinar P2/F2/Nikon F100/Bronica ETRSi/GS/Saunders 4550XLG/Jobo CPP2/CPE+/Colorline 7000

  5. #45

    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Capital of Oregon Territory
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    778
    Quote Originally Posted by RedSun View Post
    Well, I thought I could get away with saving 2 minutes with a test strip. That is about 1/2 of the total processing time. So apparently sometimes it does not work.
    RedSun,

    I see what you were trying to do. It makes sense now. When I print color with Jobo, I don't process test strips in the drum. Instead I just dunk the strips straight into the beakers with developer and blix for the given amount of time and then wash them under the faucet with running water. This way the wash is quicker and no need to bother with the test drum. The beakers a small, but if you roll the print into a cylinder diagonally, you can process up to 4x5" that way. Try it, you might find it quicker.

    Eugene.

  6. #46

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    2,682
    An unrelated reason for doing test strips exactly the same way as final prints : allegedly there's an
    interval of time needed for the latent image to fully "set". If you just pull your sample from the enlarger and right into the dev, it might come out different. I've heard anything from 30 sec to 2 min
    with Fuji papers before they should be developed. I've never tested for this myself; but then, I've
    never processed a sample that soon anyway.

  7. #47

    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Capital of Oregon Territory
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    778

    Color Paper Top Emulson Layer

    Drew,

    In theory you might be right. In practice, i have not seen any difference. Anyway, the test strips are just for getting close to the right filtration and expose. For fine tuning, i do a full size print anyway.

    Eugene.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

  8. #48
    wogster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Bruce Peninsula, ON, Canada
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,266
    Quote Originally Posted by DREW WILEY View Post
    An unrelated reason for doing test strips exactly the same way as final prints : allegedly there's an
    interval of time needed for the latent image to fully "set". If you just pull your sample from the enlarger and right into the dev, it might come out different. I've heard anything from 30 sec to 2 min
    with Fuji papers before they should be developed. I've never tested for this myself; but then, I've
    never processed a sample that soon anyway.
    So how does it work in a machine like a Fuji Frontier, where the laser paints the image on and then it immediately goes into the soup?
    Paul Schmidt
    See my Blog at http://clickandspin.blogspot.com

    The greatest advance in photography in the last 100 years is not digital, it's odourless stop bath....

  9. #49

    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    New Jersey, US
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    452
    I'm not sure the extra "pause" would make any difference. But for me, it already takes me about 2 minutes to load the exposed paper to drum, seal it, walk to the wet side and load the drum.
    A photo amateur
    Sinar P2/F2/Nikon F100/Bronica ETRSi/GS/Saunders 4550XLG/Jobo CPP2/CPE+/Colorline 7000

  10. #50
    RPC
    RPC is offline

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    387
    Red Sun, why do you use drums? When I switched from drums at high temperature (like you used to have to do in the past) to trays at room temperature, and didn't have to wash and dry the drum every print, my productivity increased manifold. I think this is one reason many darkroom workers stay away from RA-4--many still believe you must use drums or processors.

    Drew, how long do you wait before putting your prints in the developer after exposure?

Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin