Fuji Crystal Archive

mark · Aug 24, 2004

On another forum this paper is considered Butt Ugly, crap, gross, as well as other negative terms like too contrasty, inconsistent, and poor rendition of color.

Needless to say they don't like the paper. I personally have never gotten anything printed on it but I noticed that many places are moving to this paper as they print on lightjets and other digital printers. I am about to send some chromes off to be printed but am hesitant.

What are your opinions of this paper, and possible good and bad experieinces. Being somewhat color blind I do not trust myself in evaluating proper rendition of colors.

I used to get ilfochromes done but my old printer went entirly digital and upped their prices too high for me to use them anymore.

Any info will help.

psvensson · Aug 24, 2004

I use this in my darkroom, and I have nothing but good experiences. I've tried a few Kodak papers with mixed results. Most recently it was Supra Endura, which was muddy and had terribly low saturation compared to CA. I use Fuji film, which may have something to do with it, at least according to some recent discussions on photo.net.

Eric Rose · Aug 24, 2004

I use CA with both Fuji and Kodak films. Both yield excellent results.

Sjixxxy · Aug 24, 2004

I do most of my printing on this stuff through a frontier. Never had any issues, cept maybe that a strait b&w print will kind of pink under certain light times.

Might be worth the time to go get an account at ezprints.com )its free) and have them send you the free sample calibration images if you want to have a first hand look.

roteague · Aug 24, 2004

mark said:
What are your opinions of this paper, and possible good and bad experieinces. Being somewhat color blind I do not trust myself in evaluating proper rendition of colors.

I use it, love it and do all my work on it. However, I print mine using a Chomira digital printer via West Coast Imaging. See: http://www.westcoastimaging.com/

for information on this product.

Thilo Schmid · Aug 24, 2004

Fuji Crystal Archive once was rather a special purpose paper, but now there isn't much else left and current Kodak papers claim to have similar durability. I have not yet found anything negative, but if you really need subtle color rendition or if your prints are too contrasty, you should try Agfa Portrait.

Kevin Caulfield · Aug 24, 2004

I use it in my darkroom mainly with Agfa films, and I think it is great.

David A. Goldfarb · Aug 24, 2004

It's a different look from Ilfochrome, but I have some good prints on Crystal Archive, and I've seen many other good prints on it.

jd callow · Aug 24, 2004

Crystal Archive is excellent paper. It comes in three flavours, but I have only used two, C and P. C has a bit more punch and contrast than P. The difference is probably less than 1 grade in B&W. It works well with most films I've tried and I am told especially well with fuji films. I have seen fuji product labeled Professional Crystal Archive and product label Crystal Archive. I am not sure if there is a difference -- I have only used the stuff labeled Professional.

I know portrait and wedding photographers who prefer Kodak's Portra or Fuji's P and will even go so far as to hate the other. I suspect if you shoot one film and require extreme colour fidelity the nuances become something much larger.

The closest thing to an ilfochrome would be FujiFlex or kodak's DuraFlex. They are palastic photographic 'papers' with extremely high gloss, apparent if not realy high resolving power and the most punch of anything done using RA4. The Kodak seems about 50% heaveir than the Fuji and both mark, scratch and show fingerprints readly.

Both are standard RA4. Meaning they don't require the processor to run at half speed like DuraTrans or DuraClear. Kodak now sells theirs under the Endura label, which claims archival longevity. I am not sure if fujiFlex has the same longevity as Crystal Archive.

FWIW I prefer the newer Kodak papers over the Fuji's. I believe that the film you use will make a difference, but my stuff tends never to get muddy on any paper.

PJC · Aug 24, 2004

Greetings,

If you like glossy Ilfochromes, then you will most probably like Crystal Archive Fujiflex paper. I personally would never consider printing a portrait on it, but it can produce wonderful landscapes, etc.

Regards, Pete

pentaxuser · May 19, 2005

psvensson said:
I use this in my darkroom, and I have nothing but good experiences. I've tried a few Kodak papers with mixed results. Most recently it was Supra Endura, which was muddy and had terribly low saturation compared to CA. I use Fuji film, which may have something to do with it, at least according to some recent discussions on photo.net.

Using Fuji film,I have recently used both Fuji Crystal Archive and Kodak Supra Endura for prints and have seen no difference in the quality of either except that the Kodak paper requires me to turn up my Magenta dial on my Philips colour analyser to about 19 which is almost maximum.
Fuji CA paper required only about 14 as did the older Kodak Supra III paper.

Has anyone else experienced this large difference in magenta dial setting for Kodak Supra Endura and any ideas on why this should be?

Reading books on colour printing, seems to suggest that on each pack of paper there should be a Yellow, Magenta, Cyan coding which is designed to help the user with re-calibration required by new packs.

There appears to be no such coding on the packs I have bought. There is what may be coding but which means nothing to me.

As Fuji CA is the paper used by minilabs and maybe also Kodak Supra Endura, is the code now geared to minilabs which do not use YMC?

Finally I have been told the following story by a colleague of a very experienced home processor. He used to use Fuji CA. This person actually exposes 4 prints at a time protecting each from light before processing in a Nova slot processor. He has noticed that the prints that had been waiting longest for processing had actually had their colour balance changed.

When he changed to Kodak this problem disappeared. His theory was that Fuji CA was designed for minilabs where there was no such delay between exposure and processing so no problem arises.

Any comments which can cast light on the above points would be appreciated.

Pentaxuser

Jorge · May 19, 2005

Obviously I dont use color film, but I had the opportunity to see "B&W" prints from David Fokos and David J. Osborn made on Fuji CA and let me tell you they were gorgeous! (even if they were digital..grumble, grumble..)

Photo Engineer · May 19, 2005

The speed of Endura papers is as much as +15 magenta over the old Supra III paper.

I expose 5 or more prints at a time to fill my 3000 series Jobo drums using Endura paper and see no shift in density or color over the time it takes to make those exposures. I have not tried this with CA, but maybe there is a difference in latent image keeping.

To me, prints on Endura seem to be more illuminant sensitive, that is the color balance shifts a little with the viewing illuminant - more than the old Supra III did.

PE

Claire Senft · May 19, 2005

I like Crystal Archive. It is a very nice paper.

Nick Zentena · May 20, 2005

One of the changes with Endura was the increase in magenta but it's only 15 on the dial. I don't think you should be normally maxing out the magenta on your enlarger. Not for a normal negative.

Kodak last time I checked still provided starting filter settings on the box. But it's just a start. Main thing is to compare it with the last batch of paper. So you can adjust and hopefully have a little less testing to do.

IIRC Kodak claims 24 hours for the latent image between exposure and processing with Endura. Less with Supra but still it shouldn't be an issue for normal processing. I'd be very suprised if the Fuji paper couldn't handle a 10 minute wait.

highpeak · May 20, 2005

Almost all my color prints are on Fuji CA paper. The color and contrast are very good. I tried Kodak film on it, not so good. Maybe it has something to do with what kind of negtive you use. I normally use Fuji Reala 100 and NPS 160. Reala has more punch than NPS.

Wally H · May 20, 2005

I recently had an image reproduced on Fuji Crystal Archive Super Gloss that I had printed on Ilforchrome at a size of 40"x30" because Ilfochrome is no longer available to me in that size.

The image was scanned and the paper digitally exposed.

I still had a 40"x30" Ilfochrome work print and sent it to the printer for matching.

In general, the results were:

1) The FCA/SG print's color was quite close to the Ilfochrome work print and I'd consider the FCA/SG an aceptable replacement (at least in the case of this image).

2) The FCA/SG's resolution was no where near as good as the Ilfochrome work print, (I was unable to tell if it was due to the paper and/or the digital exposure technique). The Ilfochrome work print was exposed using traditional, non masked, enlarger / lens techniques.

Photo Engineer · May 20, 2005

Due to the dyes being present in Ilfochrome, and their action in preventing diffusion of the light due to turbidity, Ilfochrome will remain the sharpest of all print materials. Since the dyes in Ilfochrome are azo dyes, they can be selected for rather high color fidelity - better than chromogenic dyes in most cases.

Due to the lack of color correction in straight pos-pos printing, any print of this type will lack the ultimate in color fidelity due to the lack of color masking. The mask in color neg-pos printing makes color fidelity greater than any pos-pos system is capable of yielding. Use of chromogenic dyes almost assures less color fidelity unless masking is used.

Due to printing a pos-pos set of "S" shaped curves vs a neg-pos system of a straight line and an "S" shaped curve, pos-pos printing will always be more lossy due to image compression in the two toe and shoulder regions of the curves involved.

This is based on fundamental principles of chemistry and physics, and not opinion. Textbook references available upon request.

PE

pentaxuser · Jun 10, 2005

Nick Zentena said:
One of the changes with Endura was the increase in magenta but it's only 15 on the dial. I don't think you should be normally maxing out the magenta on your enlarger. Not for a normal negative.

Kodak last time I checked still provided starting filter settings on the box. But it's just a start. Main thing is to compare it with the last batch of paper. So you can adjust and hopefully have a little less testing to do.

IIRC Kodak claims 24 hours for the latent image between exposure and processing with Endura. Less with Supra but still it shouldn't be an issue for normal processing. I'd be very suprised if the Fuji paper couldn't handle a 10 minute wait.

Thanks for comments. I was able to get to the Kodak tech details which are helpfully provided on the Silverprint( photographic supplier) site and that confirmed what you said and gave a suggested starting M and Y setting which was close to what I had settled on when changing to Supra Endura. The Fuji paper details are nothing like as good.

I had also over calibrated the magenta and now even Supra leaves the M dial on the analyser a few marks short of max.

However other than on the Kodak technical details paper there is definitely no individual reference to a setting on the particular box of paper. Maybe the standard start setting is close enough and the individual boxes do not vary enough to warrant listing changes. Maybe the quality control these days is such that each box is for all practical purposes identical to every other box.

Pentaxuser

Nick Zentena · Jun 11, 2005

Did you buy boxed paper or was it just in black bags? Looking at the back of one box right now. On the sticker used to seal the box:

0 C + 60M + 45Y

I guess they could have changed things lately.

pentaxuser · Jun 11, 2005

Nick Zentena said:
Did you buy boxed paper or was it just in black bags? Looking at the back of one box right now. On the sticker used to seal the box:

0 C + 60M + 45Y

I guess they could have changed things lately.

Nick I have bought three boxes. One from one supplier and more recently two from another. I have just examined each again very closely.They are identical except for batch number which is what you'd expect.None show a sticker like the one you quote. Are you U.S. based? I am UK based and the Kodak Supra Endura is U.K. packed. This shouldn't make any difference. If the Y M and C is important then it's important wherever the customer is based. So still a mystery

Pentaxuser

Nick Zentena · Jun 11, 2005

I'm in Canada but I guess we get the same paper the US gets. The starting numbers are nice when you switch batches. If the next box is different you can start calibrating by the difference. Other then that I doubt it's a big issue.

Fuji Crystal Archive

mark

psvensson

Eric Rose

Sjixxxy

roteague

Thilo Schmid

Kevin Caulfield

David A. Goldfarb

Moderator

jd callow

Moderator

PJC

pentaxuser

Jorge

Photo Engineer

Claire Senft

Nick Zentena

highpeak

Wally H

Photo Engineer

pentaxuser

Nick Zentena

pentaxuser

Nick Zentena

Fuji Crystal Archive

Moderator

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency