Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,483   Posts: 1,571,186   Online: 1117
      
Page 8 of 13 FirstFirst ... 2345678910111213 LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 124
  1. #71
    polyglot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    South Australia
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    3,324
    Images
    12
    Assuming there aren't chemical or other problems, you can still have less M by dialing in both C and Y.

    (I've never done reversal RA4)

  2. #72
    hrst's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Finland
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,300
    Images
    1
    Yes, dial in C and Y.

    Yes, you have to work in complete darkness until you have stopped and washed the paper. A dim yellow special color safelight is OK only if it is really OK for normal negative RA-4 process, but better to do without any, at least when you are having problems.

  3. #73

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    268
    Same here with Fuji Astia/Sensia slides, M was a no-no, C was in 20-30 range, and Y went as far as 100. Printed on two types of Kodak paper, expired and already yellowed Ultra Endura from around 2003-2004 and fresh (2009) Supra Endura. Expired Ultra looked better to my eyes, a bit warmer and somehow more natural in balance. Also that paper seems to be thicker. There was mottle on both, and since the slides printed were portraits and generally 'busy' images, it wasn't particularly noticeable. I used a mixture of EfKe paper developer (hydroquinone, I believe) and D-76. Developed in drums, stopped with 1:5 white vinegar, washed and then re-exposed to household tungsten. Colour-processed in a clean drum with Kodak RA-4 RT/LU juice. Contrast was the least satisfying aspect, it was just too harsh. I guess it can be controlled to an extent with sodium sulfite, but it's a bit hard getting that in small amounts where I live.

  4. #74
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,370
    Images
    65
    This process is generally harsh with portraits but landscapes and nature close up scenes really have snap. In a busy landscape scene, or other busy shots, there is little visible mottle although, I am sure it is there. I have a 16x20 shot on my wall that looks pretty good.

    PE

  5. #75

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    70
    I try to do test which hrst talking about but in reverse order. All process on light and after blix I should get white sheеt of paper. my best result was yellow-grey and I think preflash is critical moment. I use 100 watt bulb and preflash 10 minute 15 cm and it is not enough paper doesn't become brilliant white. When I put in to BLIX unexposed RA4 paper it become white and it is my sample sheet. Today I try to use 300 watt bulb from enlarger. If I understand write short (not enough) pre-flash is a reason of all colour shift

  6. #76
    hrst's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Finland
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,300
    Images
    1
    You can test if your blix is okay with this test:

    Expose paper to roomlight
    Develop in 1st developer (or any BW developer)
    Stop and rinse
    Go directly to blix. (Do not color develop)

    You should get perfectly white sheet. If it is gray, your blix is dead.

    Reversal RA-4 absolutely needs a working blix because you will have both silver negative and positive overlapping - a lot of almost uniform silver density the blix needs to remove. On the other hand, it is possible that a dead blix goes unnoticed to untrained eyes in normal RA-4, where you get only subdued, darker colors by overlapping color and silver images.

  7. #77

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    70
    You was right my blix is bad it is not dead but does't work in this process. I use home made BLIX and for standard RA4 process it works good but for this process only original Fujifilm blix works. I try some different BLIX receipt from different sources all off them doesn't work with this process only original Fujifilm BLIX. My results is much better today but still does't ideal. I have some question about Your developer. How many paper i can develop with it. I try to use developer undiluted and I think it is not necessary it doesn't work better or longer I think. And second question about exposure short exposure darken picture long exposure white picture as I write ?

  8. #78
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,370
    Images
    65
    Short exposure dark, long exposure light. Your blix is not working with regular prints, but the dyes mask the failure. You should not use a weak blix with any color process.

    PE

  9. #79
    hrst's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Finland
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,300
    Images
    1
    The developer seems to last for quite long. I haven't measured, but when I did this process last time, I had a few 5 to 10 hour sessions with a lot of test sheets and prints with the same developer.

    It's not eternal though, and more dependent on water quality than real Dektol. Store in well squeezed full bottles like any developer and do not keep for many weeks.

    And yes, if your blix does not work with this process, then it won't work with normal RA-4 either! This process just makes the problem much more pronounced (that is, completely unusable). This brings back memories. I did a lot of prints with Tetenal RA-4 kit. Then, when doing reversal RA-4, I found out the blix problem. Then I reblixed most of my normal color neg prints originally processed with Tetenal blix, and they got brighter colors! I just had assumed all along that "RA-4 should look like this", using that defective blix all the time.

    About the exposure time, yes, it is as you write. There is a secondary effect, though, due to a large color crossover involved in the process; at least for me, overexposed pictures also looked magenta and underexposed pictures looked olive green. So, you should FIRST fix your exposure time down and THEN start to tinker around with the filtration. Then you probably need to repeat this once more.

  10. #80

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    70
    That is my today result Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Irakli-test.jpg 
Views:	44 
Size:	297.0 KB 
ID:	51589 it is too violet I need to use filters like normal RA4 process or I need write exposure and then colour become normal ? I don't know it because I never print Cibachrome only RA4. About My blix I don't know I redevelop in original Fuji blix my one picture and it isn't going better. Maybe my BLIX almost dead but stil works for normal RA4 process but whith this process it doesn't works normal. By the way it is very good test whith BW developer and BLIX You at once see Your blix is dead or not.



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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