RA-4 Developer with Hydrogen Peroxide

[Mike Chalmers]

Hey all,

following @Greg Davis videos, I added 15ml of 3% hydrogen peroxide to a one-shot 120ml of dev.

I wanted to try this because I have a slightly underexposed shot (a handheld blue-hour portrait) of which I wanted to see if I could get a print I was happy with. I was getting close with exposing for the blacks and a bit of dodging, but not the contrast I wanted.

So anyway, with the H2O2, the blacks are certainly increased but I also found the following:

- the image has a green cast
- the paper iteslf (on the borders that were masked / not exposed to the image) is more yellow than usual

I'm using a stop bath (citric acid), which works fine and have been getting good results (compared to no stop).

I know I could subtract some magenta filter and so on, but that doesn't resolve the yellow cast and I wanted to check i wasn't making any other mistakes.

Maybe I'll go back to standard dev and dodging. I can get the result I want with a scanned neg so I'm finding it frustrating not being able to get the same (or better) results in print.

Thanks!

 

[Tom Kershaw]

I suspect one contrast problem with optical RA-4 prints, is that there is only one grade - similar to only having 'grade 3' available for black & white work. Would be life easier to have 'soft' and 'hard' paper available.

Tom

 

[Mike Chalmers]

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.

Okay will do.

I had also considered increasing the concentration of the stop.

I've just realised you used a water wash after stop - did you try it without?

 

[koraks]

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.

 

[halfaman]

Bleach&Redevelop has also downsides. It is a bit of annoying process with too many steps and very difficult to graduate because rehalogeanting occurs extremely fast with RA4 paper (almost instantaneous if you use ferricyanide as bleach). Peroxide addition is more friendly if you can manage it.

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

 

[Mike Chalmers]

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.

Hey Koraks, I chose preoxide as it's more "friendly" as @halfaman says.

I currently have blix (a large quantity) and don't plan on buying more / seperate chemicals at this time. Further, I don't want any loss in saturation (if anything, I want more saturation). So this isn't for me just now, but thank you for the explanation.

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.

Yeah, I thought this might have some impact, I am going to put this aside for now (don't want to spend all my energy getting bogged-down is this one print) but will get some acetic acid to make stop bath for my next tests / when I come back to it.

I found some color shift with both contrast increase alternatives, I always have to modify filtering a little when I use any of them

Good to know, not a big issue having to modify filtering as long as the yellowed edges get resolved.

Thanks!

 

[koraks]

very difficult to graduate because rehalogeanting occurs extremely fast with RA4 paper

I wouldn't even think of trying partial bleaching. It's all or nothing. But even so, it gives some control over contrast.

Of course, whether modifying chemistry or altering the processing steps, it's in any case going to be a mess outside the margins of the process as it's intended. No guarantees, except that the result will always be compromised to some extent.

 

[Mike Chalmers]

No guarantees, except that the result will always be compromised to some extent.

While I do agree, Greg's results looked pretty incredible, considering I'd previously heard contrast control in RA-4 wasn't possible. It's on video, but the results did seem to adjust the contrast with no colour shift or other negative effects:

 

[koraks]

There's probably a narrow working point where you get acceptable results. The example in the video looks like a fairly monochromatic image which will give some more leeway before color issues become problematic.

 

[halfaman]

I wouldn't even think of trying partial bleaching. It's all or nothing. But even so, it gives some control over contrast.

With hidrogen peroxide you can be more gentle. A 5% addition (or 5 ml per 100 ml) is a mild contrast increase, impossible to get with double developing according to my experience.

 

[Joakes]

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

 

[Mike Chalmers]

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

Joakes, I appreciate you giving insight despite the time that's passed since this thread was last active - this could be invaluable for me or others. I do think this is the same issue as I had.

What do you mean by the last sentence about the developer?

 

[Joakes]

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!

 

[Mike Chalmers]

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!

Great, thanks for this!

 

[DREW WILEY]

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.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Now that I've had some time to experiment on my own with alleged RA4 contrast reduction using sodium sulfite as per the linked Greg Davis video, let me briefly share the result. Right now, I'm printing on Fujiflex, which has the most contrast and color saturation of any of their lineup. 25ml of 1% sodium sulfite per liter of RA4 developer didn't do a damn thing. At double that amount, 50ml, it just barely lightened deep tones, but did mess up the highlights with serious magenta crossover. I don't think this is a realistic option for me.

I'll get to the peroxide contrast increase question later. But I'm skeptical about that too.

 

[Joakes]

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 pave purchases Lynn Radeka masking Kit. This seems like the best solution to make a quality print the way you want. HP does work, takes the haze out and ads punch. i Think with time and experience masking is not hard. prob atm the moment paper selection is so limited that you take what you can get

 

[halfaman]

I don't like either sodium sulfite as a 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]

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.

Thats right actually I’ve thought of that myself. For less contrasty image use CAII as it’s black are shite. Attached is a test of such an example. CAII top endura bottom. Portra 400. Also I purchased what is called Kodak PD paper (australia) which is for digital also. Talking to the supplier he said it is the same weight as endura but less silver content so less contrast. I’ve not used it yet as I’m in between houses and not printing atm

 

[koraks]

@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.

 

[Joakes]

@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.

Yeah when I realised this I actually threw out the whole box just so I could store my endura cut sheets. Apparently DPII is the Fuji paper you want to use.

 

[koraks]

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.

 

[Joakes]

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.

Finding paper has been really hard. I managed to snag a few large rolls of endura, 12in and 40in but it has vanished for now. Problems with the Chinese company is bankrupt. Here in australia, getting paper from Fuji is also very difficult. I spoke to Fuji and they are only shipping certain size rolls of DPII and only large quantities. When I get around to it I’ll order a roll of Fuji supreme from B&H which still seems available albeit a special order. How does supreme compare to endura in terms of contrast?

 

[Joakes]

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.

Ag photographic in the uk seems to stock it. That is prob where I will try. I’m trying to print bigger these days 20in roll is what I’m after and Ag photo stocks 20inch

 

[koraks]

How does supreme compare to endura in terms of contrast?

It doesn't. That is to say, its contrast and color balance are similar to the other Crystal Archive papers. It essentially gives the same colors as CAII but with good blacks, so technically contrast is a little higher.

Ag photographic in the uk seems to stock it.

Yeah, I know, they list a couple of variants as available, at least they did last time I checked. It's probably old stock because I've been seeing the exact same stocking situation on their website for 3 years now.