Color paper: size and brand

[zehner21]

Hi,
I would like to start printing colour photos.
However, I'm a little bit confused about the paper.

1) There are only two brands of colour paper: Kodak, which isn't really suited for optical printing, and Fuji.
Here and there, I read that Kodak films don't "do" well on Fuji papers. Is it true? If this is true, this would me a
major turn off for me, considering that I have shot only Kodak films.

2) I'm not really interested in printing larger than 24x30 cm. Why can't I find 10x15/13x18 sheets?


Bonus Question -- I have a Cibachrome-A drum. Will it be useful for anything?

 

[pentaxuser]

I see no reason why Kodak paper isn't any good for optical printing but it is only obtainable in rolls. Well strictly speaking even this isn't true as I believe there is at least one source for sheet Kodak paper but this is cut specifically for that source. I cannot remember who that is but I think it is a source in Germany. Maybe someone here will know

Fuji does cut sheets on most sizes except the two you mention and given that many mini-labs print on Fuji RA4 paper from Kodak negatives to the satisfaction of customers then I can see reason why Fuji paper can't do prints from Kodak film

pentaxuser

 

[DREW WILEY]

That Ciba drum will be fine. I recommend either Kodak RA/RT chemistry used one-shot in that drum, or a direct generic equivalent. You also need some kind of water bath to keep your chem bottles at proper temp, and good ventilation. Kodak film prints wonderfully on Fuji paper. Don't believe all the idiotic rumors you hear on the web. Like anything else, you need to calibrate your colorhead to the specific film and paper itself. I don't know how the correct cut-sheet Fuji papers are specifically branded and distributed in Europe. That might take a little homework. Allegedly Calumet in Europe has the correct stuff. Here it's readily available from various distributors, while Calumet itself has gone out of business here. And it's important to recognize that there is a distinction between "digitally optimized" Fuji CAII papers, which are actually engineered as improved for BOTH digital and optical printing in enlargers, versus "digital only" photofinishing papers which typically are distributed only in narrow rolls. The factory tech sheets should tell you which is which.

 

[sfaber17]

I haven't tried the Fuji yet, but did some Mitsubishi with old Kodak negs and was pleased.
The standard sizes are 8x10 and 11x14 which don't quite fit the aspect ratio of 35mm.
The drum would work assuming it is the right size for your paper, but the trick is to use
it with a water bath that is maintained at the right temperature. Around 20 deg. C the times
are pretty long, and I'm not sure what they are. I use 31.1 deg C with good results.

 

[DREW WILEY]

I standardize on 2 min development at 30C. Times shorter than this make it difficult to fill and drain the drum quickly enough, while longer times
increase the risk of temp drift inside the drums.

 

[RPC]

My experience is that all films print well on both Fuji and Kodak papers. I have only used cut sheet papers, Kodak Endura and Fuji CAII.

You can use drums to develop, but also trays at room temperature for two minutes using the Kodak RA/RT developer (this is the way I do it, and others here on APUG as well), but beware this developer has a strong odor that may be objectionable to you.

 

[EdSawyer]

Out of date Kodak Endura in cut sheets is likely still 100% fine to use. If you can find some cheap from the last 5 years, I'd start with that.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Early on (5 or so years ago or more) it was Fuji films that did not print well on Kodak paper. You had it backwards and the problem appears to be solved. It was apparently due to the extra layer in Fuji films, but I am not sure.

PE

 

[AgX]

There are only two brands of colour paper: Kodak, which isn't really suited for optical printing, and Fuji.

Not quite true. These are quite easily to abtain,

But aside of these there at least are also papers from Agfa and Lucky.

 

[miha]

Agfa?

 

[bvy]

You'll go through the same steps to balance the frame you're printing no matter the film. Kodak films print beautifully on Fuji Crystal Archive paper.

For my money, drums are the only way to go for RA-4.

 

[AgX]

For my money, drums are the only way to go for RA-4.

There are very interesting roller processors once made by Thermaphot and Durst.

There also is a nice and simple slit-processor once made by Jobo. There still is made something of that kind by Nova.

 

[bvy]

Right. That's why I qualified it with "for my money." Drums are a quick and economical way to get started with color printing. There are days, though, when I wish I could automate the whole process.

 

[DREW WILEY]

I have a nice roller transport unit still sitting under wraps. And a fellow retiring his big lab even offered me a 50 inch wide Kreonite for free, and I even have the wattage in my lab to run it .... but.... I'm allergic to RA4, so still prefer to do it in drums. I obviously load the drums in the darkroom, but then I have a completely customized portable drum processor that I can wheel outdoors in mild weather which will accept up to 30X40 inch prints, and it is vastly easier to repair and maintain than any fully automated machine. I can also mix just enough chem for a given work session and use it one shot, which is quite economical in a properly leveled and insulated drum, and no need to fuss with replenishment. I print only my personal work and am not a commercial lab doing large volumes of prints, so this system works well for me.

 

[RPC]

For my money, drums are the only way to go for RA-4.

I once used drums at high temperatures but after finding out it could be done in trays at room temperature I switched and never looked back. With trays, I no longer had to wash and dry the drum, which saved time; I could make small test prints instead of 8x10 which the drum would only take, which saved paper; I could turn on the room lights once in the bleach-fix to check the print whereas with the drum I had to go through the whole cycle; saving more time. I don't use a pre-wet or stop bath and rarely get streaking on prints whereas with the drum streaks would happen if not used. In short, productivity is much higher and cost and setup is low.
The RA/RT developer has good shelf life and capacity I can print for several sessions with the same developer and produce nearly the same number of prints as I would using a drum one-shot.

The only downside is the odor of the Kodak developer. But I am not bothered too much by it, and can mix developer from scratch chemicals without the smelly preservative in the Kodak developer and it does not have the odor of the Kodak, although it will have a shorter shelf life.

 

[MattKing]

If you use drums, try to get extras.

With at least 3 at hand, most of the drying can be done with a dish drainer and air drying.

 

[DREW WILEY]

I would never ever do color processing in tray. The odor might not be bad, but that certainly doesn't mean you aren't getting slowly sensitized
to the chem. ... then one day, whameeee, and you can never get around the stuff again. I've seen entire lab careers go down the drain that
way. But if you must, good ventilation is key.

 

[bvy]

Every person has their own workflow and preferences, but drums do not have to be absolutely bone dry to "work." In fact my own procedure for smaller drums is to fill it with water at the processing temperature, and then load the exposed paper into the full drum. This is a tempering bath and a prewash all in one. The Unicolor 8x10 drums will also take paper with a 5" edge. I cut 8x10 paper down to 4x5 and do my test strips on these. I do add a stop bath and rinse between developer and blix, but only on final prints. I skip those steps on test strips and non-critical prints. Even then, I rarely encounter streaking. Personally, I wouldn't want to handle these chemicals in open trays in complete darkness.

 

[RPC]

I would never ever do color processing in tray. The odor might not be bad, but that certainly doesn't mean you aren't getting slowly sensitized
to the chem. ... then one day, whameeee, and you can never get around the stuff again. I've seen entire lab careers go down the drain that
way. But if you must, good ventilation is key.

Well, we all go through our lives taking risks with many things we do. You could get hit by a car walking down the sidewalk but that doesn't keep people from doing it. Occasionally people get hit but most don't. Sure it is possible to develop sensitivity but most don't. Many have used trays over the years all around the world with the likes of metol, pyro, and others without incident but there are always exceptions. What kind of lives would we live if we didn't do things because of a slight risk involved. The odds are usually in our favor. As in the case of darkroom chemistry if good ventilation and careful handling is used, such as the use of gloves or tongs.

By all means you can use drums if you are concerned. But, trays are an option, albeit a slightly risky one.

 

[mklw1954]

I've made beautiful prints on Fuji Crystal Archive Type II (8x10 and 11x14) from Kodak Ektar 100 120 negatives as well as from Fuji Superia Xtra 35mm negatives (just different color filtration settings on the enlarger).

I was given old Kodak paper with a couple of enlarger deals and could not establish consistent color filtration settings so I only fresh paper; once you establish the filtration settings for your film and paper on your enlarger, you won't need test prints. Only something not properly exposed or under lighting other than daylight might need a second or third print to get the final.

I use drums on a Uniroller, cover bottles, cover the waste bucket for spent chemicals, and have some ventilation when using Kodak Ektacolor RA4 chemicals (not high temperature but 83F/28.3C). When I didn't cover things and kept the windows closed, I "felt" the chemicals (I think it was the developer). Nothing serious, but I didn't like the sensation and can't imagine it's good for you. After changing those practices, I have not "felt" the chemicals. So I personally wouldn't use trays.

I've found the Cibachrome drums to be the best with regard to not leaking and draining easily and quickly. A paper towel and air drying for a few minutes while you do other things sets up the drum for the next use without a problem.
Streaks occur when you don't use enough chemical or if you wait too long to add the next chemical. I just use a water pre-wash, developer, blix, and final water wash per the Kodak directions and get no streaks.

 

[jakelovesphoto]

1) There are only two brands of colour paper

Freestylephoto.biz has their own brand if color paper. Part of their Arista line. But I don't know how much shipping would be to you.

 

[Roger Cole]

Right. That's why I qualified it with "for my money." Drums are a quick and economical way to get started with color printing. There are days, though, when I wish I could automate the whole process.

I find the constant rinsing and drying of them a huge PITA and wouldn't print color again if I had to use drums again.

I'll either find a Nova slot processor (not distributed new anymore in North America but they come up used on eBay - I have an auto search and watch them but am not ready to spend the money yet) or use trays either with time compensating for ambient temperature or some kind of improvised water bath.

I made many color prints I was happy with in drums in the old days, don't get me wrong. It works. But it's SLOW with all the rinsing and drying, or at least it was for me and it is if you only have one drum.

 

[Roger Cole]

Every person has their own workflow and preferences, but drums do not have to be absolutely bone dry to "work." In fact my own procedure for smaller drums is to fill it with water at the processing temperature, and then load the exposed paper into the full drum. This is a tempering bath and a prewash all in one. The Unicolor 8x10 drums will also take paper with a 5" edge. I cut 8x10 paper down to 4x5 and do my test strips on these. I do add a stop bath and rinse between developer and blix, but only on final prints. I skip those steps on test strips and non-critical prints. Even then, I rarely encounter streaking. Personally, I wouldn't want to handle these chemicals in open trays in complete darkness.

Who said anything about complete darkness?

I have an Osram Duka 50 sodium safelight that is tested safe with RA4 paper, when set to lowest level and bounced off a white ceiling. The resulting illumination is almost as bright as a conventional Kodak OC, which is to say not very compared to sodium or LED black and white safelights but quite sufficient to see what one is doing. Granted they and their bulbs are long out of production but there are LEDs that can accomplish much the same thing.

Having to handle RA4 in total darkness is a myth. Even with conventional safelights there is a very dim filter that will work, but it's so dim it's almost, but maybe not quite, useless. The biggest problem isn't so much the spectral response as that RA4 is very, very fast stuff, often inconveniently fast for printing times for my tastes, but then that also lets me add a diffusing sheet under my upper condenser and convert my condenser enlarger to, effectively, a diffusion one. That diffusion sheet just makes it way too painfully slow with black and white but it actually slows down RA4 enough to comfortably dodge and burn (plus longer exposures minimize exposure errors and variations, to an extent.)

Oh, did I mention you don't need a color head either? Printing filters in the filter drawer work fine. A little less convenient but not at all that bad.

 

[bvy]

Who said anything about complete darkness?

I guess I saw that coming. Even with a safelight, I wouldn't want to deal with open trays of these chemicals. Also, a safelight introduces one more variable to the process, and fewer variables means fewer potential problems; if something goes wrong, it's one less thing that I have to check. Further, drums allow me to use the chemistry one shot (60ml for an 8x10) and more easily maintain temperature without floating trays or other means. Yes, I know you can develop at room temperature. But that fluctuates too. I guess I favor consistency at the cost of a little inconvenience.

As I said, I don't dry my drums. I fill them with water before loading the paper and dump before developing. This works well for smaller drums. I wouldn't want to fill a 16x20 drum with water. But I don't print that large very often.

And, yes, filter packs work great in lieu of a dichroic head. When my bulb burned out, I took the opportunity to pull out my condenser enlarger and learn to print color with filters. It works quite well.

 

[RPC]

The MSDS for the chemistry says low inhalation hazard when used properly, with adequate ventilaton. Some people are sensitive to it, but some are sensitive to certain foods, too. That doesn't mean they are harmful to others. A home brew developer can be made with excellent results without the stinky preservative. Trays at room temperature are simply the easiest and cheapest way to make great color prints, not sure why one would want to mess with drums or processors and high temperatures if they don't have to.