Fuji Crystal Archive and mottling

[SteD]

Anyone experience this? I can only describe it as a faint “mottling”. It shows mostly in dark areas of the print such as deep shadows. It’s the cut boxed stuff available here in the uk. Thing is I do like this paper otherwise but this effect stops me from using the stuff. It can’t be the chemistry or wash as I’m not having this problem with Kodak Endura put through at the same time.

 

[pentaxuser]

I have not experienced this myself but a picture of a print might help others to help find the cause. It might be worth using paper from the bottom of the box to see if it has affected all the sheets.

A couple of questions: Is the Fuji paper a different age to the Kodak i.e. older and if so what are their respective ages? Has previous Fuji paper been OK?

pentaxuser

 

[SteD]

It’s not something that would be visible in a picture or scan of the print.
I’ve had this from different boxes bought months apart and also when I’ve had prints from a lab on Fuji ca.
Maybe it’s characteristic of the paper but it does bug me especially as a lot of my work leans towards the contrasty side ie lots of shadow, which is where it’s most apparent.
The current papers I have are around the same age.

 

[pentaxuser]

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

 

[MattKing]

It could be something to do with the surface of the paper which results in an uneven surface "sheen". Visible, but almost impossible to photograph.

 

[halfaman]

I have used some boxes of Fuji CA like this from UK and never experienced any problema. I always use glossy finish and very ocassionaly matt finish.

 

[koraks]

I find that crystal archive II (the non-supreme, current budget Fuji paper) does indeed give mottled blacks no matter how I process it. Supreme is better in this respect, Kodak Endura is best. I've heard others complaining of the same issue. I myself have never been able to solve it.

 

[SteD]

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

Thing is I’m not getting on with endura, the saturation is just a bit too much for me. I wanted it to work as it doesn’t display that mottling.
With the Fuji it is only on the surface of the paper, not visible in normal viewing situation, so I suppose I’ll have to ignore it. By the way it’s the gloss surface I’m using. Not used lustre in darkroom, only from a lab so I’ll try some of that and also some supreme to see how they compare.

 

[koraks]

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.

 

[Tom Kershaw]

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.

I've just started to use some fresh Fuji RA-4 paper and have noticed some slight mottling in the shadows but hopefully I can work around this. I'm processing in Jobo drums as my roller-transport machine is currently defunct.

 

[koraks]

I've never been able to fully solve it.

 

[Photo Engineer]

It is a function of coating color on RC support. Both Kodak and Fuji have gone in and out of this problem chasing after cause and solution.

PE

 

[koraks]

I recognize what you say. It's even apparent in B&W RC papers depending on processing, but with B&W, there always seems to be a bit more leeway in pushing the shadows into a deep black. With color, I see this mottling in every paper so far, depending on lighting conditions. Kodak Endura seems to be the best performer I've come across.

 

[Photo Engineer]

With reversal processing it is even worse.

PE

 

[koraks]

Yes, that's one of the reasons I didn't pursue RC paper positives much.

 

[foc]

Is this mottling only on Fuji Crystal Archive cut sheets?
I assume that cut sheets are from the same batch as commercial rolls.
I have used Fuji Crystal Archive roll paper in Fuji Frontiers for a long time printing 6x4 to 12 x36 inch size.
I did see it once on one roll of 6 inch paper and it turned out that the mottling was caused by a tiny amount of moisture on the paper surface. It happened because a chilled roll was brought into a warm room and loaded into the paper cassette.

 

[pentaxuser]

If I were new to RA4 then I must admit the various posts on this thread would all tend to put me off bothering. I infer that some see it at normal viewing angle and distance and I think only one poster seems to indicate that at normal viewing angle and distance it cannot be seen -at least not by him. So as I am having to infer that others might be able to see it at normal viewing distance and angle, can I ask if others can see it at normal viewing angle and distance?

With Fuji paper is it the kind of thing that people who view a set of Fuji RA4 prints are likely to see? Is it the kind of thing that should make me insist that any colour negatives I have printed should be done in inkjet or printed on Kodak RA4 paper only?

Thanks

pentaxuser

 

[Tom Kershaw]

I'm looking at some RA4 prints at the moment which once dry look fine.

 

[koraks]

It's not so much distance and angle, but the light levels under which you view the prints. Under low light levels, there's no problem at all. But in bright daylight or bright "inspection" light, it becomes very apparent. In my experience the problem is the worst with crystal archive II, crystal archive supreme (on the thicker base) is already much better and mostly acceptable, Kodak endura is better and perfectly fine in virtually all situations. But what is acceptable is of course very subjective, and with this mottling issue, it very much depends on the image as well. I tend to shoot quite a bit of low key imagery with large pitch black surfaces and then it becomes a big problem really fast. With eg landscape photos without large patches of solid black, it's not much of a concern at all. I think that also explains why some people have an issue with it while others don't even notice any problem.
And like PE pointed out, this problem tends to become an insurmountable barrier with reversal processing.

 

[Tom Kershaw]

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.

 

[perkeleellinen]

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.

 

[Tom Kershaw]

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.

 

[perkeleellinen]

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.

No, but I think if film is a niche within photography, then darkroom printing is a niche within a niche and colour printing is a niche within a niche within a niche! There aren't many of us! I also project slides with multiple projectors which must be even more niche. To make my life even more difficult, I like fountain pens, Saab cars and single blade safety razors!

 

[BMbikerider]

This has some of the hallmarks of dampness. I had it some time ago when my darkroom was in the garage which tended to be colder than the rest of the house. Since moving to where I live now the problem has gone.

I never have liked Fuji paper for me it tended to go into the green/cyan spectrum all too easily so I have gone down the Kodak RA4 route with more consistent results.

 

[DREW WILEY]

I've never had anything like this with any Fuji Paper, any sheen or size. I do wash my prints quite well, and our water quality is quite good here and not hard with mineral content. If there is any doubt about that, you might give a brief final rinse in distilled water.