Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,929   Posts: 1,585,266   Online: 1037
      
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 26
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    25
    Thanks, PE! This is very interesting history. Some of the C and type-R prints I made in the early 80's still look good. I look forward to trying RA.

    Is Cibachrome is the only type R process left?

  2. #12
    Roger Cole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Suburbs of Atlanta, GA USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,212
    Quote Originally Posted by snapshot2000 View Post
    Thanks, PE! This is very interesting history. Some of the C and type-R prints I made in the early 80's still look good. I look forward to trying RA.

    Is Cibachrome is the only type R process left?
    As far as I know at least, yes. And it's insanely expensive.

    I'm still really tempted, since I shot up so much Kodachrome last year and have some I'd really like to print optically. Kodachrome on Ilfochrome can be nearly magical.

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    25
    That's sad I remember type R being a lot easier for filtering. Plus, it was more fun to compose on the easel.

    I picked up a free pack of Ilfochrome Classic paper this past weekend, but I have no idea how old it is. Does it age as quickly as RA papers?

    Also got a half box of Endura metallic and a small bit of Duratrans RA 4007, 11x14. I've never used any of these.

  4. #14
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,553
    Images
    65
    Ciba/Ilfochrome is a reversal print material but is not a Type "R" paper. It is non-chromogenic and has no relation to type R which was a Kodak trade mark.

    The Ektacolor 70 series papers came out in the 70s, right before Ektacolor Plus in the 80s and could use either the Ektaprint 3 or the Ektaprint 2 process. They were followed by the Supra I, II and III series in the 90s, and then by the Endura series which is current.

    It was not until the Supra series that keeping at room temperature was really good, and now with Endura, the room temperature keeping of the raw stock is quite good. Plus did not keep well IMHO, at room temp. Ektacolor 30 and 37 kept very well at room temp in research coating experiments, but when made in the plant, well.... Just goes to show you!

    The internal code for Ektacolor 30 paper was C-970 and the release was to be 1 year before or 1 year after C41 films. We made it early and released it in 1969.

    PE

  5. #15
    hpulley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Guelph, Ontario, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,214
    Images
    75
    Love the Supra III, still looks good here!
    Harry Pulley - Visit the BLIND PRINT EXCHANGE FORUM

    Happiness is...

  6. #16

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Daventry, Northamptonshire, England
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    7,158
    So just to obtain clarification Ektacolor 78 does refer to its year of manufacture. It is a late 1970s paper and if so is likely to be useless?

    Thanks

    pentaxuser

  7. #17
    Roger Cole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Suburbs of Atlanta, GA USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,212
    Quote Originally Posted by snapshot2000 View Post
    That's sad I remember type R being a lot easier for filtering. Plus, it was more fun to compose on the easel.

    I picked up a free pack of Ilfochrome Classic paper this past weekend, but I have no idea how old it is. Does it age as quickly as RA papers?

    Also got a half box of Endura metallic and a small bit of Duratrans RA 4007, 11x14. I've never used any of these.
    PE is technically right, of course, in that Ciba/Ilfochrome isn't "type R" but it is a reversal printing process and I assume that's what you meant, for direct printing from slides.

    Unfortunately it keeps far worse than RA4 if not frozen. Once thawed it needs to be used within six months or so, or so I've always read. I always kept the unopened packs/boxes in the freezer then refrigerated after opening and never had any go bad, but I always used it up in a few months.

  8. #18
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,553
    Images
    65
    Quote Originally Posted by pentaxuser View Post
    So just to obtain clarification Ektacolor 78 does refer to its year of manufacture. It is a late 1970s paper and if so is likely to be useless?

    Thanks

    pentaxuser
    My notes on concrete advances end in late '77. There is no menion of Ektacolor 70 or 78. I have samples of 30, 37 and Plus here from the dates I mentioned. So, I have to go by some guesswork in your specific example.

    PE

  9. #19

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Oxfordshire, UK.
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    2,221
    May I ask about batch consistency?

    A lot of the old photo books I've read and a lot of people who printed colour in the '80s have said that the whole process is a hassle because of the need to recalibrate the filtration after each new box of paper. My experience with Endura is that box-to-box consistency is excellent. So I'm wondering is this because of technological advance or because of the diminishing amount of paper being manufactured meaning that all boxes are from the same batch?
    Steve.

  10. #20
    Roger Cole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Suburbs of Atlanta, GA USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,212
    Quote Originally Posted by perkeleellinen View Post
    May I ask about batch consistency?

    A lot of the old photo books I've read and a lot of people who printed colour in the '80s have said that the whole process is a hassle because of the need to recalibrate the filtration after each new box of paper. My experience with Endura is that box-to-box consistency is excellent. So I'm wondering is this because of technological advance or because of the diminishing amount of paper being manufactured meaning that all boxes are from the same batch?
    I printed a fair amount of color in the 80s and I'd call that balderdash.

    Each package had a starting filter pack on it. Once I knew my actual filter pack for an average negative on a given emulsion, I could jump to a new box easily. Whatever the starting pack was, say the filter pack I ended up with was 10 more yellow and 5 more magenta than the starting filtration listed on the paper package. When I went to a new package I'd add 10 yellow and 5 magenta to THAT recommendation and be very much in the ballpark. It might take another couple of test prints to nail it, and this was a reason to buy the largest box of paper you could afford, but usually no more than a couple of prints.

    That said, filtration was one of the reasons I preferred printing from slides, either type R or Cibachrome. Not only was it much easier because I had a positive for reference, there was just much less variation from slide to slide than negative to negative.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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