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: 1,585,305   Online: 1103
      
Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 70
  1. #11
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,553
    Images
    65
    Quote Originally Posted by dslater View Post
    PE,
    Thanks for the help - I'll give that a try. One other question, the documentation for the RA-4 developer gives storage times for open tanks (1 week) and for tanks with floating lids ( 8 weeks ). Any idea on the keeping time in full tightly stoppered glass bottles.

    Thanks,

    Dan

    I have stored RA developer for over 3 months in full bottles. I usually put a nitrogen blanket over the developer if the bottle is partly full.

    PE

  2. #12

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Daventry, Northamptonshire, England
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    7,158
    The Kodak site mentions a starting filtration which is pretty close and is clearly helpful for a beginner. I have checked the Fuji site several times and read the pdf file on Crystal Archive and cannot find any such starting filtration.

    As PE has said, Kodak and Fuji paper filtrations are appreciably different. I wonder why Fuji omits to mention a suggested starting filtration?

    pentaxuser

  3. #13
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,553
    Images
    65
    Fuji might be having trouble getting stable filter packs from batch to batch.

    They went to a new method of emulsion sensitization last year, and I suspect that it may not give stable results. They also have 2 different processes out there for it, and that may compound the problems.

    Kodak also has stabilzed printing between manufacturer films whereas Fuji has not. Therefore both Fuji and Kodak negatives print well with Kodak paper, but Kodak negatives do not print as well with Fuji paper. It is due to the method of spectral sensitization.

    We used to say that the paper was not perfect until it worked with Fuji, Agfa, Kodak and Konica negative films. I have indeed done all of these comparisons with Kodak papers back when I was doing that type of work.

    PE

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    232
    I've been printing color since the early 80's when it was EP2. I don't know about using filter packs, but I've always found any suggested filter values listed on the paper to be totally useless with dichroic heads that I've used. With halogen lamps, I have found that they can vary dramically from one bulb to the next, and they also shift a little bit over time as they get old. It sucks to get a new batch of paper dialed in for certain film types and then have to change to a new lamp in the enlarger.

    You just have to do test strips and get it dialed in. 50Y and 50M is probably a good starting point if you've never printed with that enlarger before. Don't assume that you'll be able to use the same filter pack for every print with the same paper batch and film type, or even on the same roll of film. Sometimes different frames can need different filtering to get the right color balance even if they were shot on the same roll.

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Hollis, NH
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    732
    Images
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by max_ebb View Post

    Sometimes different frames can need different filtering to get the right color balance even if they were shot on the same roll.
    Yes - but doesn't that mean they were shot under different lighting conditions and the differences reflect a real difference in the light which you may or may not want to compensate for?

    Dan

  6. #16
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,553
    Images
    65
    Dan;

    That is my experience. All frames on one roll and indeed over several years should have the same balance if shot in the same illumination.

    PE

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Hollis, NH
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    732
    Images
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by Photo Engineer View Post
    Fuji might be having trouble getting stable filter packs from batch to batch.

    They went to a new method of emulsion sensitization last year, and I suspect that it may not give stable results. They also have 2 different processes out there for it, and that may compound the problems.

    Kodak also has stabilzed printing between manufacturer films whereas Fuji has not. Therefore both Fuji and Kodak negatives print well with Kodak paper, but Kodak negatives do not print as well with Fuji paper. It is due to the method of spectral sensitization.

    We used to say that the paper was not perfect until it worked with Fuji, Agfa, Kodak and Konica negative films. I have indeed done all of these comparisons with Kodak papers back when I was doing that type of work.

    PE
    Can you elaborate a little more on this? I'm not sure what you mean by "Kodak also has stabilzed printing between manufacturer films" - are you referring to consistency in the film emulsion or the print emulsion?

    Also, what kind of problems can I expect using Kodak film with Fuji paper? After reading this I wishI had bought some Endura paper. I didn't because I read a number of threads where people stated Endura doesn't have nearly as much color saturation as Fuji and that the more saturated version of Endura has quite high constrast.

    Thanks,

    Dan

  8. #18
    jd callow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Milan
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,002
    Images
    117
    There are nuanced differences between Endura and CA, but nothing to the extreme some will state.

    *

  9. #19
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,553
    Images
    65
    Dan;

    I have not printed using CA paper. I can merely state two things.

    1. People complain of difficulties printing Kodak films with Fuji paper.

    2. Kodak has worked to make sure all negative films work with Kodak Endura paper.

    This was achieved in the Kodak paper by their unique spectral sensitization that covers a large gamut of film dyes.

    As John Callow says, the papers are otherwise rather more similar than people state. There are no extremes.

    The new Fuji CA paper introduced last year has had several comments here on APUG in which people complain of having to use cyan filtration or filter packs near zero. You may want to look up those posts.

    PE

  10. #20

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Daventry, Northamptonshire, England
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    7,158
    My experience has been that Fuji negs print as well on Kodak paper as on Fuji paper. I cannot say how Kodak negs will print on Fuji paper as I have no experience of this combo.

    PE is right to say that some( well me at least)complained of needing filter packs near zero. This goes back a while.

    I complained to Fuji. They examined my prints and I got new paper without any admission of a problem but the new paper did not exhibit this problem.

    What I did notice however was that the filtration pack seemed more critical than I would have expected. I did the same part of a neg with neutral grey in it as 4 prints with slightly different packs and found that as little as 2M ( Durst 605M dichroic head )made the difference between a noticeably magenta cast and the correct neutral.

    I admit that I may not have spotted this unless I had done four 4 x 5 prints on 10x8 paper but I was surprised that as little as 2M made that kind of difference.

    This could have been the case with Kodak paper. I just don't know but my impression is that in the past, filtration with Kodak paper had not been that critical when I used Kodak Supra Endura which is a useful asset. Such fine tolerances between success and failure, so to speak, is not helpful.

    On the other hand, prints that I have got from the local minilab on Fuji CA have been perfect. I suppose that as long as the calibration is spot-on it's fine.

    pentaxuser

Page 2 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