It’s not something that would be visible in a picture or scan of the print.
.
So can I take it that it can be seen with the naked eye and would be visible to anyone looking at the print? The thing is: Even if It is only visible to you and most would not see it then effectively it still exists for you. It doesn't sound like a fault of processing and if you have seen this with other packs of Fuji paper then my conclusion would be the one I think you are arriving at which is to change paper and use Kodak.
pentaxuser
The mottling issue as I've seen it is not related to the surface but inherent to the emulsion. I've seen it in glossy as well as lustre paper. Like I said, you may want to try Crystal Archive Supreme. The issue is far less with this paper and only visible under bright light in large areas of solid black.
Endura is indeed a totally different paper and I completely understand that it's a less desirable option for you. It has inherently greater saturation (very nice, if you want it) and is a little more finicky to color balance IMO.
It would be useful to have a very high quality "premium" option available for optical colour prints from negatives. Several years ago I used Kodak Supra Endura in the darkroom with good results.
What we really need is for the people behind cut Fuji CA to start cutting Kodak Endura Premier like Nord Foto used to.
The recently much vaunted increase of interest in analogue photography doesn't seem to have translated to an extension of options for cut sheet RA-4 paper yet.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?