I would try reducing the amount of peroxide to see if you can still get a contrast bump without the green cast. I did not experience any green cast or edge yellowing in my testing.
Adding peroxide is kind of a last resort and I'm not surprised you're running into unintended side effects that are difficult to get rid of. I think in your situation I'd try a bleach and redevelop approach to boost contrast, or, if you're OK with reduced saturation, bleach bypass.
Bleach & redevelop: expose print for the highlights, bleach in rehalogenating bleach (not Blix and no fix!), rinse well, develop again, and if contrast is as desired, fix. If contrast is still too low, repeat bleach and development.
Bleach bypass: expose print, develop, and fix in pH neutral or mildly acidic (pH 4.5) fixer (no bleach or blix). This gives some addition contrast (not very much) due to the retained silver along with the dyes in the image.
Neither approach requires chemical changes to the developer, which is a benefit when you use a replenishment system.
PE remember that someone suggested him not to use citric acid as stop bath with color processes. Perhaps you can try to use acetic acid instead.
I found some color shift with both contrast increase alternatives, I always have to modify filtering a little when I use any of them
I wouldn't even think of trying partial bleaching. It's all or nothing. But even so, it gives some control over contrast.very difficult to graduate because rehalogeanting occurs extremely fast with RA4 paper
No guarantees, except that the result will always be compromised to some extent.
I wouldn't even think of trying partial bleaching. It's all or nothing. But even so, it gives some control over contrast.
I just had the exact same problem, green tint. Can’t change the filters as the paper edge is also green. So I used a fresh batch of stop after development. Then I rinsed after stop then blix. Gone! Can’t really explain it but it has come out perfectly without any caste at all. But it just happened again. I suspect either you need a minimum amount of developer in the drum or it will not work. Not sure
Hi mike. So after numerous trials with this what I found is the issue is the ratio, I typically use drums and for a 10x12 print I’d use 100ml of developer solution. If I want to bump up the contrast I’d us 1-2 teaspoons of hydrogen peroxide 3%. I found this too much for the amount of developer. If I bumped it up to 200ml of developer solution in the drum problem is gone. So, with 100ml the max I could use was a teaspoon or 5ml of hydrogen peroxide. So I suspect the ratio is important, too little developer solution with HP and it doesn’t work. While 5ml HP in 100ml of dev is the same rate as say 15ml of HP and 300ml (x3) of dev there is significantly more developer in the mix but only relatively small amount of HP. I’m no chemist or scientist but maybe there is an explanation!
Precise contrast control within reason can be done via supplemental masking - either more contrast or less. But that's hard to do unless you have a registration punch and frame. I frequently do it. I'm somewhat skeptical about peroxide since it's a bleach which might affect dye permanence. Dunno.
Ring-around, darker-lighter, blah, blah - has nothing to do with contrast per se, though it is helpful in other ways. There are paper choices giving a bit of option, contrast -wise, like Portrait papers being on the softer side.
I've never been thrilled with flashing. It has often been used to lower contrast, but it's more of a blaah effect in my opinion.
Otherwise, per the linked video - he got streaking when using peroxide, unless he did a stop and brief rinse between dev and blix - but that's what I ALWAYS do anyway, to alleviate streaking risk in RA4 drum processing. His sample prints were of a complex image. It would be more telling, streak and blotch wise, if he tried the same tricks using a subject with a lot of open sky.
I don't like either sodium sulfite as contrast reducing agent (really a dye formation competitor). To reduce just deep shadows density I use the crappy Fuji CA which is incapable of delivering deep blacks.
@Joakes thanks for posting that. It perfectly matches my observations with CAII. The old CA did produce very good blacks, CAII is just an abomination IMO.
I'm quite happy with crystal archive supreme and supreme HD (I see no difference between the two). Haven't tried DPII, but don't see a good reason to either since Supreme works as it should and is much sturdier than CAII (although not as sturdy as Endura).
Sadly Endura seems to be unobtainable and I wonder if it'll ever come back.
I'm quite happy with crystal archive supreme and supreme HD (I see no difference between the two). Haven't tried DPII, but don't see a good reason to either since Supreme works as it should and is much sturdier than CAII (although not as sturdy as Endura).
Sadly Endura seems to be unobtainable and I wonder if it'll ever come back.
How does supreme compare to endura in terms of contrast?
Ag photographic in the uk seems to stock it.
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?