Crystal Archive vs Supra Endura

DanielStone · Aug 5, 2009

hey all,

i gots me a simple question, which has a few parts to it.

I'll be starting a color darkroom class at school in just a few weeks, and having had some previous experience doing color darkroom work with CA, I have been looking to pick up another box.

I was at samys today, and thought about getting a box of Supra Endura instead, but after seeing that it was only available in 50sht boxes, I put my money back in pocket and walked out, somewhat disappointed. So, basically my question is:

1.What real differences are there between the two? I shoot only Kodak Portra C-41 films, and I've heard that they work better with Kodak paper, but I've gotten good results from CA so far.

2. I don't do many loooooong exposures in the darkroom, but does one paper have better reciprocity characteristics? If that is a valid question for this topic?

3. Consistency from batch to batch? I know that its good to test, test, test; but I don't have an analyzer with control strips, etc, just my eye. Any conclusions?

4. Which one do you personally prefer, just out of curiosity? And why?

5. Which one do you think will be around for the longest time in sheet form? I got a roll of 12" metallic a few months back, and have been cutting down 12x16 sheets and 9.5x12 sheets, but frankly, I know that $ can be saved by cutting down rolls, but I value my time more than that, more time creating/taking great pictures !

any help/recommendations would be greatly appreciated. I'm trying to standardize my workflow (if i can call it that), and be as consistent as I can, so I don't want to bounce back and forth, etc.

thanks

-dan

fotch · Aug 5, 2009

My understanding is the Kodak is designed to work with more variables, such as different brand of chemicals, tempatures, films.

Important to me is not only is it a great product from a great company, its an American company providing jobs to Americans. OK, maybe that is old fashion, and I do buy imports, but lately, buying imports is becoming the only choice. Not good.

DanielStone · Aug 5, 2009

fotch said:
My understanding is the Kodak is designed to work with more variables, such as different brand of chemicals, tempatures, films.

Important to me is not only is it a great product from a great company, its an American company providing jobs to Americans. OK, maybe that is old fashion, and I do buy imports, but lately, buying imports is becoming the only choice. Not good.

funny though , the Kodak box says that the paper is made in England, at least the last box I looked at a year or so ago.

but I agree, keeping MY money in OUR country is very important to me. Sending it overseas doesn't improve our economy very much IMO

The school is PCC (Pasadena City College), and they use a Kreonite? processor with Kodak RA-4 chemistry.

E76 · Aug 5, 2009

As a student at RIT, I would probably be drawn and quartered if I showed up with a box of CA, so for that reason I use Endura. I like the paper though, so the slightly higher cost and availability only in 50 sheet boxes is not an issue for me. The N surface is excellent.

hka · Aug 5, 2009

I'am very happy using CA for years now. Nice paper, easy to handle with any film brand or developer.

AlexG · Aug 5, 2009

As much as I love Japan and Fujifilm, I continue to buy Endura for my color printing needs.

Were in tough economic times and companies that make "archaic" products are not doing too well. I think spending money to support an American company is smart idea. Besides my patriotic agenda, I think Endura works wayyyyy better with the Portra films. I'm sure the engineers at kodak tested the paper using Portra, so I think it's a good idea to go with kodak stuff.

Leave Crystal Archive for the minilabs. Use Endura.

railwayman3 · Aug 5, 2009

DanielStone said:
funny though , the Kodak box says that the paper is made in England, at least the last box I looked at a year or so ago.

but I agree, keeping MY money in OUR country is very important to me. Sending it overseas doesn't improve our economy very much IMO

I believe most, if not all, Kodak paper is made here in England, whereas all films are coated in US (but finished in Mexico).

So you buy "our" paper, we buy "your" film. International trade.

Tom Kershaw · Aug 5, 2009

railwayman3 said:
I believe most, if not all, Kodak paper is made here in England, whereas all films are coated in US (but finished in Mexico).

So you buy "our" paper, we buy "your" film. International trade.

Very true. If we didn't have international trade the analog photography market might be very much worse off. I presume the USA wants to be able to export manufactured products to the European Union and other countries or political entities.

Tom

Ektagraphic · Aug 5, 2009

I prefer Endura. I think it is better all around.

L Gebhardt · Aug 5, 2009

I like them both, though with Fuji ProS (or what ever it is called) I like the Fuji Paper. It is a bit more vibrant and seems to have whiter whites. I've had no issues with Ektar 100 on the CA paper, but my experience with it has been limited.

DanielStone · Aug 5, 2009

thanks for the tips guys, if anyone else has something to add, please do!

-dan

p.s. i wish that SE was available in 100sht boxes, not just the 50 sheeters

2F/2F · Aug 5, 2009

I have used Fuji RA paper in the past, but use Kodak almost exclusively.

I started doing so because Kodak had Ultra Endura, Portra Endura, and Supra Endura (plus Endura Metallic). It was kind of like having three grades of paper. Fuji only had two.

I find that Fuji films print great on Kodak paper, and the opposite is a bit more tricky.

Fuji has more sizes available at Freestyle, so for big paper, I have always got Fuji. However, recently, I have seen 20x24 Kodak return to Freestyle.

Also, Kodak only has Supra Endura left. What a horrendous shame in my book.

At the same filtration, I find that Fuji paper is cooler than Kodak (or vise versa; whichever what you want to state it). It is even so if you bring a sheet of each out into the light unprocessed. The Kodak is pink, and the Fuji is blue. This does not mean that both cannot be made neutral; just that one is inherently different than the other as far as color balance.

I prefer Kodak, but they have pretty much got rid of all the reasons why I prefer it. In the past year or so, they have eliminated 3/4 of the emulsions on which I relied (well, Metallic is still around, but only in rolls), have eliminated certain sizes and certain surfaces (8-1/2x11 surface N, for instance), and I cannot see them reversing any of this at this point. I have considered switching to Fuji, as two emulsion choices are better than one, the same way that three emulsion choices were better than two when I started using Kodak.

bob100684 · Aug 5, 2009

2F/2F said:
I have used Fuji RA paper in the past, but use Kodak almost exclusively.

I started doing so because Kodak had Ultra Endura, Portra Endura, and Supra Endura (plus Endura Metallic). It was kind of like having three grades of paper. Fuji only had two.

I find that Fuji films print great on Kodak paper, and the opposite is a bit more tricky.

Fuji has more sizes available at Freestyle, so for big paper, I have always got Fuji. However, recently, I have seen 20x24 Kodak return to Freestyle.

Also, Kodak only has Supra Endura left. What a horrendous shame in my book.

At the same filtration, I find that Fuji paper is cooler than Kodak (or vise versa; whichever what you want to state it). It is even so if you bring a sheet of each out into the light unprocessed. The Kodak is pink, and the Fuji is blue. This does not mean that both cannot be made neutral; just that one is inherently different than the other as far as color balance.

I prefer Kodak, but they have pretty much got rid of all the reasons why I prefer it. In the past year or so, they have eliminated 3/4 of the emulsions on which I relied (well, Metallic is still around, but only in rolls), have eliminated certain sizes and certain surfaces (8-1/2x11 surface N, for instance), and I cannot see them reversing any of this at this point. I have considered switching to Fuji, as two emulsion choices are better than one, the same way that three emulsion choices were better than two when I started using Kodak.

If I'm not mistaken, the pink and blue are either antihalation layers, or there simply so you can tell the paper is loaded correctly in a minilab style magazine. They should wash out completely while processing.

langedp · Aug 6, 2009

2F/2F said:
Also, Kodak only has Supra Endura left. What a horrendous shame in my book.

Ultra Endura is still available but only in roll form. My favorite paper.

Photo Engineer · Aug 6, 2009

The dyes in paper are there to serve as acutance dyes and to adjust the paper speed so that each batch has the same color balance and speed on-easel. Both Kodak and Fuji use the same method. They wash out in the process.

PE

nickandre · Aug 6, 2009

Crystal archive turns my developer green and supra endura turns it red...it also stains the tongs those respective colors.

I have a room temperature setup and I'm now selling my remaining Crystal archive. When used in the room temperature setup, the new fuji paper has nasty magenta crossover in the highlights. I don't recall noticing it with the older enlarger optimized version but I'm not going to try to keep two paper's filtrations written down. I don't know how many of you this will effect.

AFAIK, the Kodak paper with kodak films is awesome and a wise man once said, if it ain't broke don't fix it. My reply when someone asks me why I shoot film is to show them a print. Full Frame camera, but much cheaper to print on awesome glossy paper.

DanielStone · Aug 6, 2009

Kodak paper with kodak films is awesome

YUP!!!

"if it ain't broke don't fix it"

STRONGLY AGREE why is it that even with technology progressing at the rate it is, people seem to discard all these terrific cameras that could give them many and many more years of faithful service, but they discard them for these pieces of crap(digital) that they will end up replacing a few short years? film is at the best place it could be at the current moment, with all the current emulsions available, excluding kodachrome

-dan

B&Wpositive · Aug 6, 2009

1. I'm not sure. There is a difference, but I'm not sure what it is. I can see it, but it's not like pen versus pencil or anything drastic.

2. Not sure. I remember doing some longish exposures, but I forgot which paper it was on.

3. Don't know. I only had one batch for class. Sorry. You don't need an analyzer. Trust your eyes.

4. Both. I'm not sure why. I just like them. The Fuji had really nice blues and greens though.

5. No idea. I'm still looking for someone who can use the paper I have left over from class last summer.

As far as help/recommendations go: Keep an open mind. Good luck and have fun.

You're welcome.

Bob Carnie · Aug 7, 2009

Both Kodak and Fuji , are very , very , very good in their colour neg paper offerings.
I switched over to Fuji from Endura three years ago, main reason availability and supply.* Having a rep from the company is critical for us , as they solve many problems face to face, Unfortunately Kodak has fazed out these men and women in our area and it probably has hurt them tremendously.*
Most custom labs will use one product over the other for economic, supply and bargaining for support reasons. Having direct technical, marketing support is also a key reason for using one over the other.
In Toronto , labs can deal with Fuji direct , which is a blessing and for this reason most of the labs are using their product.
This may be the biggest reason from my perspective , as we cannot predict demand for colour paper and having inventory four hours away is compelling.
I have moved from paper to paper over the years and never once felt that I was compromising quality by using one Manufacturer's product over the other.

Pupfish · Aug 7, 2009

I've always used Kodak RA4 papers, mostly Kodak C41 print films, and only few Fujicolor neg films, and thus had very few problems with dialing in color in my D/R.

But I wonder if more regular users of Fuji neg films find that the "4th" magenta layer for mixed lighting sources causes a cross-over problem when printing optically in their own wet lab on Kodak papers (Kodak not having this same layer in their own emulsions)?

Commercial and mini labs are scanning now, even many of those with optical wet chemistry output; I'd think dedicated channels or digital profiling would obscure this cross-over much or at least some of the time. (But then I've also seen hideous color crosses with certain films from some labs).

Any thoughts on this?

Photo Engineer · Aug 7, 2009

Our design criteria for Kodak papers was that all negative films should print well. IDK what Fuji and Agfa had as design criteria.

That is about all I can say.

PE

DanielStone · Aug 8, 2009

Photo Engineer said:
Our design criteria for Kodak papers was that all negative films should print well. IDK what Fuji and Agfa had as design criteria.

That is about all I can say.

PE

thanks for the info PE, its greatly appreciated .

this is why I shoot EK films. designed by photographers, for photographers .

-dan

Robert Budding · Aug 8, 2009

Kodak Endura is beautiful.

Bob Carnie · Aug 8, 2009

Fuji Crystal Archive is sublime.

DanielStone · Aug 8, 2009

Bob Carnie :

Fuji Crystal Archive is sublime.

Robert Budding :

Kodak Endura is beautiful.

now, now...

lets settle this in the ring, ok?

Crystal Archive vs Supra Endura

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency