I found in the very dim and distant past that processing RA4 in a drum is setting you on a hiding for nothing. Having to wash out the drum between each print and then drying it is a task that is fraught with problems if the last remnants of the blix is not cleaned out. I have been printing RA4 since 1991 and soon dumped the roller system for a deep tank processor. That is the 1st step to getting consistency.
I've got a Nova slot processor that I haven't used yet and sometimes put a print on a clip and go through the motions with my eyes closed. Not that easy for me to get paper into the slot.
How do you time the 45 seconds?
Then the temperatures you are using are too low. The recommended temp for Kodak and Tetenal RA4 is 35c and the development time 45 seconds. Whilst altering the times as you have may compensate for the lower temperatures, it is not what they were formulated for and there could be your problem.
With a deep-tank such as a NOVA you do not have to pre wash and the possibility of cross contamination virtually eliminated. Yes I still make mistakes, but that is always down to operator error and not the equipment or the processing sequence
Well I certainly can't see any red cast here. Can you explain again what the difference is in the two scans in terms of what you did?
When I saw the overhead shot of this scene I kept on getting a feeling of deja vu that is I kept thinking I had seen these scans before but I may be completely wrong.
pentaxuser
Hi Pentaxuser,
Both of these were exposed and processed exactly the same but there is a fair difference in them and I can't understand why. now I'm thinking the difference is in the density between the two.
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?