It "used to be" that color paper had wider tolerances in manufacture, and there were more variables in results from negative to negative. Color analyzers were useful in situations where a photographer was printing hundreds, if not thousands of images of very similar or identical subject material, such as portraits or weddings, where the goal was very consistent skin tones.
Nowdays color paper (and film) is very stable and consistent in characteristics, and once you arrive at a filtration for your film, paper and processing set-up, just about the only thing you need to vary is exposure.
You don't use an analyzer to arrive at your initial color balance, this can only be done by trial and error. You have to make a perfect print to program an analyzer. Now, unless you expose an industry standard 18% grey card as the first frame of each roll, and program your analyzer to a perfect print of this grey card, you will never have an identical "spot" on each roll to adjust your color balance with. Color paper is so much cheaper than black and white paper, I have always just made a few tests to get balance. Used to be that minute variances in light from the enlarger could alter color balance in significant ways, also changes in exposure time could alter color. This is old information, just not valid with modern materials. With modern materials you do not need a voltage stabilizer on your enlarger head. Partly due to improvements in paper technology, and partly due to better stability of our modern electrical utility providers. However, don't run your enlarger from the same circuit that runs your household air conditioner.
Before I started colour printing I was expecting to have huge variations in filtration for every negative - hence why I have been so suprised at the consistancy - infact I've found it hard to get it wrong - and, as you say, have found myself only fiddling with exposure, but usually one test strip has pretty much nailed it.
Infact, I've found less variation in exposure, from neg to neg, than monochrome.
In the 60s, color paper came with an exposure index like -1.5 or + 2.3 and a color index like -10M +10Y.
To move from your current paper to the new box, you multiplied exposure by the exposure index, and added the color index to the filter pack.
Our goal in 1965 was to eliminate Cadmium and Mercury for sure, and ferricyanide from the process, but a side goal was to eliminate this and have a constant speed product. The first paper to achieve this was Ektacolor 30 and 37 papers in 1969, one year ahead of schedule.
C41 was to come out one year before or one year after, so we came first with EP3 then they came out 1 year later.
Regarding my short exposure times - I wonder if this is anything to do with the amount of filtration I find I am commonly using in the DeVere colour head - I always seem to be hovering around 20M 20Y - or thereabouts.
Don't know if this is significant.
Matt
Hi Matt,
What paper and film are you using? I am using a beseler dichro-Dg color head to print Portra VC 160 and 400 onto Kodak Supra paper. My filtration is something like 65 Y 70 M. When I first started RA-4 printing I was using a condenser head with color printing filters, I had very low filtration values and very short times - turned out my condenser head didn't have heat absorbing glass and my paper was responding to IR. Since you have a color head this seems unlikely - is your color head a dichro color head?
Also, I think - though I'm not sure of this, that Fuji Crystal Archive paper needs less filtration than Kodak paper. One thing you can do to increase your exposure times is add more filtration to add neutral density. For example, if your filtration is 20M 20Y, you can change it to something like 40M 40Y 20C - this will give the same color balance with less light - sorry if you already know this.
Good luck,
Dan
Hi Matt - sorry - I just realized that I've already posted most of this to you.
Hi Matt,
What paper and film are you using? I am using a beseler dichro-Dg color head to print Portra VC 160 and 400 onto Kodak Supra paper. My filtration is something like 65 Y 70 M. When I first started RA-4 printing I was using a condenser head with color printing filters, I had very low filtration values and very short times - turned out my condenser head didn't have heat absorbing glass and my paper was responding to IR. Since you have a color head this seems unlikely - is your color head a dichro color head?
Also, I think - though I'm not sure of this, that Fuji Crystal Archive paper needs less filtration than Kodak paper. One thing you can do to increase your exposure times is add more filtration to add neutral density. For example, if your filtration is 20M 20Y, you can change it to something like 40M 40Y 20C - this will give the same color balance with less light - sorry if you already know this.
Good luck,
Dan
Hi Matt - sorry - I just realized that I've already posted most of this to you.
Thanks for this - I'm using Fuji CA and mainly enlarging Kodak Portra negatives, although I have also enlarged some Fuji negs too.
The enlarger head is a Dichro head.
I have attached what was my first print I even did - it was from a Fuji Reala negative onto FCA.
Thanks - I thought this would be a good negative to choose for my first colour print!
Matt
Yes it is - looks like you got the skin tones right. Do you have a set of print viewing filters? I have found them very useful for getting that first print right. Also, you might want to try Portra paper. From my admittedly limited experience, it seems to need less filtration adjustment from negative to negative than CA does.
Dan
Emancipate yourselves from mental slavery;None but ourselves can free our minds. - Bob Marley
Adv Reply
Originally Posted by Matt5791
