Big Big Prints - 7.5'x6' - What does it take?

[DREW WILEY]

Being flippant on a subject like chemical safety benefits nobody. All you've
got to do is know as many "artistes" as I do who were macho with chemicals in their youth and now have deep regrets over ruined health, or know labowners who were put out of business due to accrued hypersensitivity. As far as I'm concerned, anyone who works with RA4 in
open trays is a downright fool. Just because you don't get irritated with the smell doesn't make it safe. I've known people even working at the sales counter in labs getting sick over time. RA vapors and air suitable for breathing are two different things.

 

[MattKing]

Being flippant on a subject like chemical safety benefits nobody. All you've
got to do is know as many "artistes" as I do who were macho with chemicals in their youth and now have deep regrets over ruined health, or know labowners who were put out of business due to accrued hypersensitivity. As far as I'm concerned, anyone who works with RA4 in
open trays is a downright fool. Just because you don't get irritated with the smell doesn't make it safe. I've known people even working at the sales counter in labs getting sick over time. RA vapors and air suitable for breathing are two different things.

Drew and I agree on some things, and disagree on others. Care is required, but I do not believe that open trays are inherently dangerous. Working without gloves, and in particular where ventilation is inadequate would indeed be stupid and dangerous.

I too know a very few people who have developed hypersensitivity, but they will to a man (or women) admit working in environments or using methods that are admittedly stupid.

 

[TSSPro]

I print at max 30" wide cause that is as wide as the roller transport processor goes. But even then, I'm using a 10x10" enlarger to enlarge 4x5 & larger ektar and portra negs which are brutally sharp even at that amount of magnification. The enlarger goes through the drop tile ceiling and probably weighs 800lbs. So not the most accessible piece of equipment for the average home user.

 

[Bob Carnie]

Mick has given you the answer I will add a few things of my own, seems like Mick and I have a few things in common.

Kodak made monster RA4 roll paper , and a few labs worldwide had super size process capabilitys for RA4 processing, I believe Duggal in New York is still doing this. There has to be one in Europe as Stursky(sp) needs his prints somewhere.
I worked at Jones & Morris in 1980 and we had a 72 inch processor and used Durst 2501 horizontal enlargers to make extremely large murals.
We would even make panels that butted together would fill entire rooms.The best size negative would be 8x10 and we were able to work from original camera negative OK , otherwise the photographer would be compelled to use chrome and we would make 8x10 internegs. Kodak 6121 I believe eh Mick?
I wonder if PE designed that emulsion, I sure used a lot of it in my youth.
These super size prints Mick is describing were a daily thing, and we were very careful in the setup as he explains.
To even consider RA4 in trays is like thinking about washing down a Rhino with a toothbrush.

Today there is wide format inkjet machines and wide format Rhoe flatbed ink jet that can make super size prints but their quaility is nowhere near a RA4 optical print. YET, but with stitching Large Format Film.. oh shit here I go on the dark side again.
I will admit they are getting much better and we will once again see a resurgence of monster prints from stitched large format capture done on a flatbed.
The Durst Rhoe unit, right now has a 8 ft high by whatever length you can feed into it. therefore you could see at a gallery wall near you a single piece of imagery 96 inches by 40 ft or longer. The Durst Rhoe is basically a epson print head driven by a Lambda software.I have assess to one of these, print price 10k any takers.

Plexi and sintra come in monster rolls of hugenormous size and can be imaged directly on... I suspect one of the usual characters(Sturky,Jordan....} will figure this possibility some day and make the big one. just stitch 20 8x10 films and slowly image onto the plexi or sintra, then overlaminate with hot lam... you heard it here first folks.....I can imagine one day the commercial side of my business would consider one of these suckers, but the 1/2million plus 30k per year service contract is not for me, I put down on a Lambda and not to willing to put another monster on my shoulder again.

The widest generally available RA4 colour paper was from Kodak. It came in various sizes but the largest size I ever used, was paper that was 6' wide by 100' long.

The actual largest single one piece print I have ever done, is 6' wide by 18' long. This was around 23-24 years ago, things have changed somewhat.

The roller transport developing machine was 6'6" wide, let me tell you that feeding in a piece of paper that long and wide in total darkness, was an art form by itself. The paper had to go in dead square, otherwise somewhere after the start, the edge of the paper would start meshing with the gears, which would firstly stuff the print up, and secondly, possibly jam the processor; real problems and time waster when that happened.

If you do a search, you should find some threads regarding large prints.

For wall projection with these sizes a metal wall is best, using magnets to hold the paper up. You must remember that all of this is done in total darkness and for a print of this size two people work in complete darkness to unload a specific length of paper, cut it with a Stanley knife, then affix it to the wall in the correct position. Exposure is often up to 10 or 15 minutes with very big enlargements. Familiarity with your co-worker, was an important pre-requisite to working in the darkroom with this kind of enlarging!

The minimum negative size is 4x5" with 8x10" being preferable. By using copy internegative materials (no longer available) one could take a 35mm transparency and dupe it up to an 8x10" negative for enlargement.

From start to finish often took a minimum of three days as checks and client approval was needed at every step of the way. The process is/was so expensive, mistakes had to be kept to a minimum.

Mick.

 

[holmburgers]

Fascinating accounts from all.

Mick, your view into the operation, and cooperation is most telling. I can't imagine the expense of messing up something that big, and of course getting an artistic and perfectly rendered print; it's very impressive.

A good read from many, thanks.

On a side note; a professor at KU and I were talking about big RA-4 prints, though more like in the 36-48" range lets say. He emphasized that none of that stuff was done in trays, "no way" he said. It was all roller processor stuff, and he made a comment that this had to do with the surge in large color prints in the 80's, particularly at universities where students had the ability to mess around with those sizes now.

 

[DREW WILEY]

I'm going thru fits deciding whether or not to install a 50" Kreonite or just stick with the 30x40 drum
processor I already use. I could make a much bigger drum system, but I think anything bigger than
30X40 and the chemical cost efficiency would signifiant decrease, because larger and larger relative
volumes would be need to keep the temp tolerances tight. Fill and drain time also become bigger
issues. Really monstrous prints have zero market in this part of the world, and if Scarface did build
a really ostentatious Miami mansion around there parts, his taste probably wouldn't correspond to
anything I print anyway.

 

[Bob Carnie]

Drew , do yourself a favour, keep the drums, it is a constant issue for us to keep paper going through our 30 inch RA4 machine.
To keep it in control we basically have to run exposed paper each day,,,, demand or not otherwise the process goes bad.
Keeping a good line going with RA4 is not as easy as one would think and the key ingredient is exposed paper.

I'm going thru fits deciding whether or not to install a 50" Kreonite or just stick with the 30x40 drum
processor I already use. I could make a much bigger drum system, but I think anything bigger than
30X40 and the chemical cost efficiency would signifiant decrease, because larger and larger relative
volumes would be need to keep the temp tolerances tight. Fill and drain time also become bigger
issues. Really monstrous prints have zero market in this part of the world, and if Scarface did build
a really ostentatious Miami mansion around there parts, his taste probably wouldn't correspond to
anything I print anyway.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Yes, thanks Bob. My logic is that I'd just run the machine seasonally a few months and do all my RA printing
in sequence, then have to clean it out for the rest of the year. The drum would be available for casual work.
But drums are pretty slow for the whole sequence of test strips, print, reprint etc. And by simply disconnecting
the dryer I don't need any new wiring. Some plumbing and space headaches, yes.

 

[Danielle]

Danielle:

Note the instructions for tray development in Kodak publication J-39: http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/support/techPubs/j39/j39.pdf

If you read through a variety of Kodak technical publications, you will realize that there will be specific and detailed warnings if certain chemistries or processes involve unusual safety concerns. J-39 includes no such warnings.

It is not that care isn't required, but rather that the usual sort of care is sufficient.

Thanks, I had a squiz at a it. Interesting. Ok, so obviously its still chemicals and care is required a decent dose of it, but it can be done reasonably safely. Cool. - I've actually never done colour since doing it through a machine. That was really cool, put it in the machine on one end in complete darkness and grab it at the other end completely dry. Neutralise the colour, dodge/burn and spit it out again. I still think thats the best way but I do believe those machines cost a small fortune not to mention take up considerable space.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Yes those machines did cost a fortune. I won't say what I can get one for.
But Bob already pointed out how they have to be keep in pretty much
continuous operation to be reliable. There also tends to be municipal
effluent regulations regarding true industrial processors, and they need a
LOT of wattage dry to dry. But since my office is just a block away from a
major industrial and scientific pipe supplier, I was just wondering whether
I should just go ahead and make a drum processor from hell with virtually
no maintenance issues whatsoever. They stock plastic pipe up to 24 inches in diameter and can get it up to six feet in diameter, just about anything. But I just wonder if I want to tackle yet another shop project,
even though I'm perfectly comfortable with plastic fabrication.

 

[Bob Carnie]

Ok that makes sense, if you have space, John Callow does this with RA4 himself.

Yes, thanks Bob. My logic is that I'd just run the machine seasonally a few months and do all my RA printing
in sequence, then have to clean it out for the rest of the year. The drum would be available for casual work.
But drums are pretty slow for the whole sequence of test strips, print, reprint etc. And by simply disconnecting
the dryer I don't need any new wiring. Some plumbing and space headaches, yes.

 

[langedp]

Yes, thanks Bob. My logic is that I'd just run the machine seasonally a few months and do all my RA printing
in sequence, then have to clean it out for the rest of the year. The drum would be available for casual work.
But drums are pretty slow for the whole sequence of test strips, print, reprint etc. And by simply disconnecting
the dryer I don't need any new wiring. Some plumbing and space headaches, yes.

That's what I do Drew. I have a 30" Kreonite RA-4 processor in my darkroom that I only fire up occasionally, primarily when I want to do 30"x40" prints. I even drain the tanks back into some large containers after a session and rinse the machine down. I'll then fire it back up a day or so later. Once I've consumed my replenisher I pretty much shut it down, rinse it out well and then it sits for months until the need for 30"x40" comes up again. I use my Jobo system for everything smaller. Considering I got the Kreonite for free, it has been a pretty good set up.