Everything you want to know about FUJIFILM color RA4 papers

[koraks]

Is anyone unhappy with the quality color prints with current Fuji papers?

In relation to what I know these papers are capable of when digitally exposed: yes.
As holiday snapshots that give the satisfaction of being able to make them all at home: no.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Most "holiday snapshots" are going to look funky either way. So what's your point?

 

[Steven Lee]

Fact of the matter is that they're engineered for digital and this means the 'fit' between RA4 paper and optical printing just no longer exists: https://tinker.koraks.nl/photograph...a4-paper-is-digital-and-why-this-matters-not/

Excellent blog post. Thank you.

 

[DREW WILEY]

It's going to take some more sleuthing. This Spring I'll be working mostly with Fujiflex again (latest version); and its Tech Sheet specifically states it's made for optical enlargement as well as laser printers. And it's probably their best color "paper" ever. It's a stunning product for optical enlargement. But that true high gloss is not suitable for every image, and it's well outside the budget of many, being available only in big wide rolls.

CAii cut sheet ain't all that bad for many things. But let's continue to give each other feedback on other paper options as we get opportunity to try them. As far as I'm concerned, the native crossover issue in certain color negs films themselves is half the battle. Seems like quite a number of people are perfectly happy using enlargers for DP (digital) CA papers too. As for masking? Ha! I've made so many of those I could almost do it in my sleep. I find it kinda relaxing.

 

[halfaman]

The paper base of FUJI seems to be a little lighter in weight than the Kodak version and more prone to kinking with larger sheets.

I am not so sure about weight, but Fuji base is not as stiff as RC B/W paper (Ilford). I use DPII almost exclusively and I had a very hard time framing a 40x50 cm (16x20') digital ordered print in a 50x60cm (20x24'') passpartout due to wobbling. The damn print could not stay flat! It forces me to laminate it against the backing board. I can see some wobbling even in a 28x28cm (11x11'') print I enlarged optically myself and framed in a 40x40cm (16x16'')passpartout.

I print digitally (ordered) and optically the same photo in Fuji DPII several times and I don't find it unsuitable for the darkroom. On the contrary, I like some of my optical prints more than the digital ones. You can feel its digital purpose on the very short exposure times (with 35mm and 8x10'' I need to use a one stop B+W ND filter) and with the non linear color balance and density (a third of stop is not a third of the base times, it is much less, and time can affect color balance) but I can tame it with dichroic filters so far.

 

[koraks]

I am not so sure about weight, but Fuji base is not as stiff as RC B/W paper (Ilford).

This is certainly possible, and of course, Fuji also uses several base thicknesses. Having said that, DPII is on the higher end of the base thickness gamma, so it's about as good as it gets. I recognize your comments about wobble though. Framing big prints ideally involves mounting them to a stiff carrier.

Coincidentally, the RC paper base of the Fuji paper comes from the exact same source as Harman/Ilford's, as far as I can tell. Virtually the only manufacturer of photographic paper bases currently is Schoeller. This doesn't mean all papers are the same - far from it, and I suppose Schoeller may even manufacture specials for individual clients provided they buy sufficient quantities.
Mind you, the base comes from Schoeller, but Fuji does still laminate the PE layers on both sides if my memory serves, and everything on top of that (evidently).

 

[DREW WILEY]

There are standard basic techniques for permanently mounting prints flat, and if one does not have the skills or special equipment to do it themselves, take your picture to a professional frame shop. There's one in our city which has done it for spliced print images forty FEET across; and I'm not talking about an outdoor billboard. My own in-house capacity is up to 40 inches wide. But any detailed discussion of specific technique belongs somewhere else than this thread; and I don't have time to get into it today.

 

[sillo]

Been printing with Fuji Crystal Archive Type PDn, very happy with the results even though all the data sheets I found only mention digital printing. Weirdly I've been able to get it as a single roll pack here in the states. 10"x275' from Unique Photo.

 

[DREW WILEY]

The local labs which formerly used Kodak Radiance successfully switched over to CA Supreme, which is specifically prescribed by Fuji for optical printing as well, but only available up to 12 inch roll width.

Large roll widths are available for type CA, which is rumored to be equivalent to DPii in the EU.

Large rolls are also available for Maxima, which a few optical printers have somehow managed to get ahold of, and are happy with; but so far, I haven't been able to acquire any.

Type PD seems to have been replaced by PDn (new digital version). It appears to be available in wide rolls too, and sounds interesting. I usually find 30 inch wide rolls the most versatile for my own use. Sillo - what color neg films are you printing on it, and what kind of subject matter?

 

[Steven Lee]

@koraks wouldn't the "digitally compromised" papers reveal their bias in characteristic and sensitivity curves?
From the Kodak Endura datasheet:

Fujifelx:

Interestingly, Fujicolor Crystal Archive datasheet does not list the characteristic curves. Perhaps your blog post is the reason why?

 

[x.rasenas]

Surprised it took 3 pages but is there anyway we can get a clear guide on all fuji papers? They offer about 4-5 different options of "pro" papers.

Fuji CA II, Fuji Supreme which seems to only be a thicker CAII? Fuji DPII (which seems to be only available only in Europe? What is the silk surface closest too?) Fuji PD, is this the nicest of all of them? Cutting a luster roll as we speak and it needs a good amount of flashing. Not sure if I'm missing more, I know certain ones only come in glossy or matte etc.

Would be nice to list out all papers available at the moment in light of the mess going on with Kodak.

 

[MattKing]

This will be great! All I know is that when you rinse the dye layer off, you can do away with something like an 85a filter...

Are you, by chance, using them to make in-camera negatives?
That is a whole different enterprise than printing from film negatives.

 

[koraks]

@koraks wouldn't the "digitally compromised" papers reveal their bias in characteristic and sensitivity curves?
From the Kodak Endura datasheet:

Indeed, I would expect so, and I've also had a look at that Endura curve you posted for the exact same reason. Interestingly, a man called Richard has replied to my blog discussing Endura Digital paper and indicated that in optical printing you can either balance it for a greyscale and then the skin tones end up 'ruddy', or you can balance for skin and end up with cyan greys.
What we currently don't really know is what the situation with classic Endura is, exactly. If memory serves, the datasheet you got that curve set from dates back to 2007. I don't know if that paper is being made anymore.

Fujifelx:

Note the interesting blue deviation. Btw, this is a different one than what I describe on my blog, which indicates a similar (but not identical) deviation on green/magenta. Then again, we do know that FujiFlex is the only RA4 material being manufactured in Japan. The papers and FujiTrans are made in the Europe plant. I have yet to check what the commonalities between Flex and other RA4 materials are.

Interestingly, Fujicolor Crystal Archive datasheet does not list the characteristic curves. Perhaps your blog post is the reason why?

Well, the thought certainly has crossed my mind...I'll be sure to ask why they include some information in one datasheet, but not another. If I were to hazard a guess, the answer will be along the lines of "we ask our customer base what they need to know and we include that, and the Japanese colleagues made a different call than we did for FujiFlex."

Surprised it took 3 pages but is there anyway we can get a clear guide on all fuji papers?

Well, this is one issue I plan to bring up with them, because Fuji isn't all that clear about everything just yet. I suppose they feel that they're already serving the market well enough with the information they make available, but I suppose us darkroom users have a habit of desiring another level of information. There's this, though:

I took this from the sampler box I got, so I've in fact got small (4x6") samples of all of the papers listed above.
This suggests that the Pro papers are Digital Type DPII, Digital Pearl, Maxima and Velvet Type H. These use the 'professional' emulsion, in varying layer thicknesses and with various finishes/topcoats.
The 'Sharing' papers use what they internally referred to as the 'amateur' emulsion, again in varying thicknesses. There's only some unclarity on the CA Supreme HD, which I was told is actually the pro-emulsion even though it's in the 'sharing' category.
The 'Album' papers are generally thinner paper bases (for books/albums, this is of course convenient), sometimes even so thin (on the XS paper) that two sheets can be glued back to back by the finisher to create double-sided pages in an album. I don't know how the amateur and pro emulsions map onto the Album paper range.
You can find pretty much all of these papers on the dedicated website Fuji made a few years ago for this: https://www.originalphotopaper.com/en/products/photographic-papers/
You'll find they also list a Canvas and Linen paper (under 'creative'), while their Velvet is also mentioned as a 'creative' paper there while it's listed as a 'professional' paper in the overview above.
From this you can distill that Fuji is also not perfectly consistent in how they present their range to the outside world. This is one thing I'll bring up with them, because I'm sure we're not the only ones who are a bit confused by this.
Note that there are also FujiFlex, which is missing from these lists because it's made in Japan, and Fuji Trans. Why the latter is missing from any overview, I can only guess. It's produced in Europe alright, so it's a bit of a mystery why this is such an orphaned material. Perhaps because it's for a legacy market that doesn't see much turnover? Just a wild guess.

Fuji CA II, Fuji Supreme which seems to only be a thicker CAII? Fuji DPII (which seems to be only available only in Europe? What is the silk surface closest too?) Fuji PD, is this the nicest of all of them?

CAII is the entry-level paper. The Europe plant doesn't call it CAII - for them it's just Crystal Archive.
CA Supreme is the same emulsion, but with thicker image-forming layers, thicker interlayers, and poured onto a thicker base. The different layer thickness results in a higher chroma and wider gamut. I've printed both Supreme and plain CA side by side once and the difference was very apparent indeed (both prints were nice btw).
CA Supreme HD is again an improved version but I was told this uses the Professional emulsion instead of the Amateur. I've yet to verify. I have printed both Supreme and Supreme HD and never noticed much of a difference at all for optical printing...I didn't pitch them side by side. I have yet to try this as I still have a few sheets of the HD left.
DPII is the 'default' Professional paper, coated on a fairly heavy base and using the Pro emulsion set. I don't think there are distribution limits; if it's unavailable in the US, that's probably just due to distributors not having stocked it, or perhaps the US market uses one of the 'Sharing' products instead. The DPII is of course more expensive, which is something photofinishers will be sensitive to.
Fuji 'PD' I'm not familiar with. A datasheet I found dates back to 2005. Perhaps this is the predecessor of DPII, or maybe it's the label under which DPII is retailed in the US market? It's also possible it's a product that was manufactured in the US, but since that plant no longer makes any paper, it may simply have been axed.

The 'silk' surface is identical between DPII silk and Album High Definition. It is very similar to a Foma Fomatone paper I've printed on once or twice; I think it was Foma's 532 paper, which doesn't exist anymore I think. I've seen other B&W papers (especially from the old days) with similar/identical surfaces. I would describe the silk surface as a well-visible structure of regularly spaced circular bumps with a diameter of perhaps 200um-300um or so, raised maybe 50um from the paper surface. It feels kind of 'raspy' if you wipe your finger over the surface. It's a far coarser pattern than any other of their paper surfaces. It's incomparable to the luster you're cutting, or the matte that I've also used on occasion.
Personally, I'm not a fan of the silk surface, but it sure is unique.
Also unique is the 'Velvet' surface - which I do really like. It's a true dead-matte surface, which makes the blacks seem less dense. Its surface looks nearly identical to e.g. Fomabrom 112 or Adox MCC 112 matte fiber-based papers. I've never seen any RC paper with this particular surface!

I've taken several notes that all boil down to "can you make the paper overview a little more consistent and clear, please." Although I must say that the advent of the originalphotopaper.com website has been a dramatic improvement over the previous website listings, which were totally unusable from my perspective. Since my main contact happens to be the guy behind that new(er) website, I'm hopeful that suggestions on information transparency will end up in the right place

 

[foc]

Also, have a look here for some more details.

https://www.originalphotopaper.com/en/products/photographic-papers/

 

[koraks]

Also, have a look here for some more details.

https://www.originalphotopaper.com/en/products/photographic-papers/

Yes, that's the go-to website for (most) papers they produce. I've posted this link a couple of times in this thread, but it's useful enough to repeat it from time to time!

 

[foc]

Yes, that's the go-to website for (most) papers they produce. I've posted this link a couple of times in this thread, but it's useful enough to repeat it from time to time!

Sorry about the reposting of the link, my memory must be failing me.

 

[Lachlan Young]

The concern of availability of tiny volumes (in cut sheet, short rolls, single rolls) is something I've already brought up with them, but we haven't truly discussed the matter yet.

Given that they already have a converting partner (Harman Technology) who are doing their sheet format conversion/ packaging from what are presumably master rolls, why can't/ won't Fuji provide a more premium paper to go through the process instead of the very basic one they currently offer? Something like Maxima or the Velvet matte in sheet formats would probably do pretty well.

 

[koraks]

Given that they already have a converting partner (Harman Technology)

Is this something you know, or suspect? It's not something I asked them and they didn't mention it.
So far I have the distinct impression going by the packaging I see for sale that there are two or three parties cutting boxing RA4 paper. Nordfoto is one, Impex/Adox might be another and a third could be closely related to Fuji, but that's a wild guess on my part.
Nordfoto in any case also sells DPII cut sheet.
The person whom I briefly discussed fut sheet with at Fuji simply said that Fuji doesn't sell any cut sheet whatsoever, implying that any operation happens outside the company and possibly not even in association with them.

I guess what it boils down to is that regardless of what Fuji may or may not do in terms of cut sheet, essentially anyone can decide to purchase a box of rolls and cut & repackage it for further distribution. My suggestion hence would be to raise the issue with your preferred supplier and see if they are willing to look into the matter. I'll also talk to Fuji about it, of course.

 

[adamlugi]

Hi,

RA4 primarily I do on DPII luster, I am satisfied , The biggest challenge is with the choice of chemistry and its durability. The question is what chemistry will give the best results for a durst icp 42 machine - unfortunately, the tanks are small and there is a lot of agitation.
Well, and the question what advantages vs DPII has Maxima. And Is it worth buying instead of Mp 160 chemistry CPRA Digital Pro, unfortunately in Poland they are only in 50 liter packages.

 

[koraks]

The question is what chemistry will give the best results for a durst icp 42 machine - unfortunately, the tanks are small and there is a lot of agitation.

Good point, I'll be sure to ask which chemistry options are preferable for various use cases!

what advantages vs DPII has Maxima.

Maxima has a larger gamut and deeper blacks, but requires attention to processing as default RA4 processing may not sufficiently penetrate the thicker layers (image-forming and interlayers) of this paper. So you may have to reduce the speed of your processor or increase temperature to get Maxima to perform as it should. However...since it's unlikely to perform as it should with optical enlargement anyway (just like DPII), I do personally wonder to what extent this is really a significant issue.

 

[Lachlan Young]

Is this something you know, or suspect?

It says 'Made in the UK'/ 'FujiFilm UK Limited' on the box - and it exactly matches Ilford's packaging techniques. Ilford have a long (and ongoing) relationship with Fuji. It may be that Fuji UK send master roll/ wide roll to Harman and get it packaged.

 

[koraks]

It may be that Fuji UK send master roll/ wide roll to Harman and get it packaged.

Wide roll, yes. Master roll, certainly not. Those aren't transported in their entirety from the Dutch plant. They're all cut to manageable roll sizes in-house.

It's certainly conceivable that Fuji UK receives rolls from the Dutch plant and that they consequently hand them over to Harman to do the cutting & boxing. It would make perfect sense, indeed, and it's also completely logical that the person I talked to wouldn't be aware of this nuance to the story.
What's interesting is that he did explicitly say that Fuji UK obtaining rolls to produce cut sheet is now a thing of the past. He did not mention how distant a past, and I do see boxes for sale at e.g. FirstCall at present. They could be old stock - you never know. But it's also very possible that Fuji UK no longer acts as a middle man and that it's now First Call or Harman who directly order rolls, or that nothing has changed, but Fuji UK just doesn't mention the cut sheet business internally anymore. If they do the UK distribution for RA4 paper, which I assume is one of their duties, I don't see how the marginal cut sheet business would be of much interest to talk about internally. Those handful of rolls can easily piggy-back on top of the volume flow towards the photofinishers.

 

[halfaman]

Is this something you know, or suspect? It's not something I asked them and they didn't mention it.
So far I have the distinct impression going by the packaging I see for sale that there are two or three parties cutting boxing RA4 paper. Nordfoto is one, Impex/Adox might be another and a third could be closely related to Fuji, but that's a wild guess on my part.
Nordfoto in any case also sells DPII cut sheet.

Lachlan is refering to this.

Fuji Crystal Archive Cut Sheets | Ag Photographic+Photolab

Fujicolor CRYSTAL ARCHIVE sheet sizes This is the only option currently available for traditional colour silver halide paper in sheet sizes (as opposed to r ...

www.ag-photolab.co.uk

I heard also that it is cut by Harmann. Very fine product regarding regarding trim quality, dimensional tolerances and packaging, much better than Nordfoto for example.

 

[sillo]

Type PD seems to have been replaced by PDn (new digital version). It appears to be available in wide rolls too, and sounds interesting. I usually find 30 inch wide rolls the most versatile for my own use. Sillo - what color neg films are you printing on it, and what kind of subject matter?

Almost exclusively portra 400 and 800. I've also printed lomo 800 and fuji c200 with good results. Mostly portraits/street stuff. Processed with replenished Champion chemistry in a nova slot processor. Still learning so they're not perfect, but I'm much happier with this paper compared to CAII.

 

[koraks]

Thanks @halfaman - I'm aware of that retail packaging; it's offered by a couple of players, also on the European mainland. As said, the Harman link makes good sense.

Large roll widths are available for type CA, which is rumored to be equivalent to DPii in the EU.

Type CA is probably not DPII. According to this datasheet, Type CA doesn't come in rolls larger than 12", suggesting it's more likely comparable to the plain CA or Supreme papers from the EU. Given the not so clear information Fuji publishes online on this paper, rumor is probably the most 'reliable' information we have so far.

@sillo, nice prints!