Reversal RA-4 experiment thread.

hrst · May 25, 2012

You can test if your blix is okay with this test:

Expose paper to roomlight
Develop in 1st developer (or any BW developer)
Stop and rinse
Go directly to blix. (Do not color develop)

You should get perfectly white sheet. If it is gray, your blix is dead.

Reversal RA-4 absolutely needs a working blix because you will have both silver negative and positive overlapping - a lot of almost uniform silver density the blix needs to remove. On the other hand, it is possible that a dead blix goes unnoticed to untrained eyes in normal RA-4, where you get only subdued, darker colors by overlapping color and silver images.

Sergejs Orlovskis · May 25, 2012

You was right my blix is bad it is not dead but does't work in this process. I use home made BLIX and for standard RA4 process it works good but for this process only original Fujifilm blix works. I try some different BLIX receipt from different sources all off them doesn't work with this process only original Fujifilm BLIX. My results is much better today but still does't ideal. I have some question about Your developer. How many paper i can develop with it. I try to use developer undiluted and I think it is not necessary it doesn't work better or longer I think. And second question about exposure short exposure darken picture long exposure white picture as I write ?

Photo Engineer · May 25, 2012

Short exposure dark, long exposure light. Your blix is not working with regular prints, but the dyes mask the failure. You should not use a weak blix with any color process.

PE

hrst · May 25, 2012

The developer seems to last for quite long. I haven't measured, but when I did this process last time, I had a few 5 to 10 hour sessions with a lot of test sheets and prints with the same developer.

It's not eternal though, and more dependent on water quality than real Dektol. Store in well squeezed full bottles like any developer and do not keep for many weeks.

And yes, if your blix does not work with this process, then it won't work with normal RA-4 either! This process just makes the problem much more pronounced (that is, completely unusable). This brings back memories. I did a lot of prints with Tetenal RA-4 kit. Then, when doing reversal RA-4, I found out the blix problem. Then I reblixed most of my normal color neg prints originally processed with Tetenal blix, and they got brighter colors! I just had assumed all along that "RA-4 should look like this", using that defective blix all the time.

About the exposure time, yes, it is as you write. There is a secondary effect, though, due to a large color crossover involved in the process; at least for me, overexposed pictures also looked magenta and underexposed pictures looked olive green. So, you should FIRST fix your exposure time down and THEN start to tinker around with the filtration. Then you probably need to repeat this once more.

Sergejs Orlovskis · May 25, 2012

That is my today result

it is too violet I need to use filters like normal RA4 process or I need write exposure and then colour become normal ? I don't know it because I never print Cibachrome only RA4. About My blix I don't know I redevelop in original Fuji blix my one picture and it isn't going better. Maybe my BLIX almost dead but stil works for normal RA4 process but whith this process it doesn't works normal. By the way it is very good test whith BW developer and BLIX You at once see Your blix is dead or not.

Sergejs Orlovskis · May 25, 2012

One question about Re-expose . When paper become slightly pink it's means that picture is reexposed completely and further re-exposure does not give anything. I use 100 watt bulb and white places of picture become slightly pink after 3-5 min it is enough and I can redevelop or I can re-expose more and result will be better ?

Photo Engineer · May 25, 2012

Remove Cyan and Magenta to fix this up. Start by removing 10C and 20M to see how it works. The picture appears too blue/magenta on my monitor.

A failed blix with normal RA4 processing will seem to work but will give dull colors. With this reversal process it will give very bad overall gray images.

PE

Sergejs Orlovskis · May 26, 2012

One Question about re-exposing after re-expose picture must look that

this happens which picture after re exposure of 2-3 min 100 watt bulb further re-expose doesn't effect on picture colour. That means the picture is totally re-exposed.

hrst · May 26, 2012

2-3 min near a 100 watt bulb is enough.

Your picture looks quite good except for filtration. Note that the filtration works the opposite way compared to normal negative processing. If you need to add yellow, you increase yellow filtration. So it feels more logical, the effect is exactly the same as you can see in the image projected by the enlarger.

And if you are already at zero on magenta, you can add both C and Y at same amounts.

Sergejs Orlovskis · May 26, 2012

I am almost understand how it works. My today best result

at now I understand why ciba prints was so expensive You need to do very much test prints to get great result. I try to mix Your developer 1 / 3 and I think it works better. Developer Works like soft working developer and I can get soft "grey" BW neg. For normal BW process this kind of neg is awful because very hard to get normal BW print but for this process it works great. Tomorrow I try mix developer 1/4 and I do many Re-exposure test and I think then longer Re-ex time than better and colourful print You can get but I not shore yet I check it tomorrow.

hrst · May 26, 2012

Now it seems that you have reached the "typical" point in Reversal RA-4.

As stated by Photo Engineer many times, portraits just do not look very good in this process.

It is difficult to get clean highlights, they always seem to end up cyan and/or yellow and you cannot correct them with filtration. This one seems to have both cyan and yellow cast in highlights.

OTOH, if you print a scenery, different color casts in areas of different brightness may not be bad thing at all, but cyan or green foreheads do not look very appealing.

You can try to do two things to try to clear highlights: (1) reduce the amount of bromide in FD, (2) add some sodium thiosulphate to FD.

If I get back to this process, I am planning to try three things: (1) softer (lower contrast) first developers (maybe including 2-bath developers), (2) using thiocyanate in FD, instead of / in addition to thiosulphate, (3) using SLIMT (latent image ferricyanide bleaching pre-FD).

Photo Engineer · May 26, 2012

Ok, if you are talkng color photography, dye density is proportional to silver mass developed. In B&W photography, density is not always proportional to the mass. Soft working developers often change the morphology of the developed silver, and not the mass and therefore changing FD does not change contrast in this type of cross process.

PE

Sergejs Orlovskis · May 27, 2012

One question about colour developer. How long it works ? I print yesterday all day and re-develop a lot of pictures in it and CD doesn't chance colour. In usual RA4 process developer become dark after it's dead. I use fuji chemicals and they nab be stored without air for a long time.

hrst · May 27, 2012

Mixed RA4 developer is almost eternal in terms of shelf life! It can also develop an enormous number of prints. I have never counted.

In normal RA-4 process, it discolors (usually to dark magenta) because of the dyes released from papers. This doesn't mean it would be dead! You can use the developer as long as you get good blacks with your usual developing time, the dyes from papers that make it dark do not affect the process in any way.

Naturally, in the reversal process, these dyes end up in first developer, stop and wash water, so you can maintain the original color of the color developer. In the terms of number of prints, it is no different from normal RA-4. And, you can use the very same developer between these processes, just make sure you wash the papers well before going to color developer.

If you decide to make a "low contrast color developer" by adding sodium/potassium sulfite at about 0.5 g/l, you can also use it for both processes for the same lower-contrast effect.

Sergejs Orlovskis · May 27, 2012

In Your first developer is only 0.2 g potassium bromide. Reduce it more ? Today I try to add some sodium sulphite in CD. When I mix concentrate I add 0.2 gr of thiosulphate today I try to add more.

Sergejs Orlovskis · May 27, 2012

In normal RA4 process I use Jobo processor and very low quantity of chemicals and after processing I pour developer into west because developer is very exhausted and can not develop second picture, but if I pour this developer in to bottle of fresh developer it exhausted all developer and In that quantity of developer I develop less quantity of pictures and only fresh fuji developer store good and long period of time. If you develop some quantity of pictures and store used developer for 2-5 days it works but you need another filtration and exposure time to get same result. I experimented which that and found If I print some picture write filtration on other side and try to repeat my picture after some days I need always use fresh chemicals or to do all filtration process from the beginning.

Sergejs Orlovskis · May 27, 2012

Maybe I isn't write but I think only BW image contrast is important

hrst · May 27, 2012

I have had EXACTLY the same filtration with one liter of 2 year old developer used at least in 10 sessions during those 2 years, in a tray, producing at least 50 prints of 8x10" size, probably even more! This seems to be true for both Tetenal "room temperature" developer (45 - 60 seconds) and KODAK RA-RT developer (2:00 - 2:30). Furthermore, these two produce almost identical results with same filtration. I don't know about Fuji but it should be identical enough.

I think something is going on with that Jobo. I used to drum process Ilfochrome prints in Jobo, as it is often stated that it's the "only way" and Ilfochrome chemicals should be used one-shot (probably just one more internet legend, but oh well, due to the smell of Ilfochrome bleach, I was happy not to do it in open trays). But I wouldn't do any other process in drums. I think that drum processing is wasting time, effort and chemicals. Especially for RA-4, where you only need three trays and the chemicals are very resistant against oxidation.

Sergejs Orlovskis · May 27, 2012

And someone question. At now I use original fuji BLIX but I don't know how long it works. How many pictures I can BLIX with it ? Earlier I use my homebrew BLIX and when half of Jobo bottle going out I do 0.5 litre of blix and replenish it.

Sergejs Orlovskis · May 27, 2012

Maybe You write but for drum processing you need smaller space and for me personally this type of processing is more clean. for one picture I need only 80 ml of developer and after processing this quantity of developer become really bad. I try to process RA4 in trays but cleaning my bath after that is awful. But in this type of process only BW processing, stop and wash is suitable in the drum. For normal colour re-developing after pre flash minimum 1 litre of colour developer is need. maybe BLIX also can be doing in drum but it is not convenient to doing that.

darkroom_rookie · May 28, 2012

What is the best solution for contrast then? Pre-flashing? Sodium sulfite in colour developer or also in BW dev?

Roger Cole · May 28, 2012

boom_bass said:
I am almost understand how it works. My today best result View attachment 51658 at now I understand why ciba prints was so expensive You need to do very much test prints to get great result. I try to mix Your developer 1 / 3 and I think it works better. Developer Works like soft working developer and I can get soft "grey" BW neg. For normal BW process this kind of neg is awful because very hard to get normal BW print but for this process it works great. Tomorrow I try mix developer 1/4 and I do many Re-exposure test and I think then longer Re-ex time than better and colourful print You can get but I not shore yet I check it tomorrow.

That's not why Ciba prints were expensive. They were expensive because the materials were expensive, almost ridiculously so during the last few years. In fact when I printed both Ilfochrome and RA4 I needed fewer test prints and wasted less (but much more expensive) material with Ilfochrome. You are experimenting with a process that isn't exactly optimized and has a lot more variables than Ilfochrome, and isn't (probably, and this seems particularly so for portraits) going to look as good even if done perfectly. Ilfochrome was easy because you had the original transparency as a reference, and the filtration didn't seem to change much among the same film types - once you had it for Kodachrome, or most Ektachrome, or Provia or whatever, you were pretty much there for that film type printed on that emulsion batch of paper. Oh bad exposure or odd lighting could change it, but corrections were more intuitive too. And when you started a new emulsion batch of paper you could compare the starting pack printed on it, see how it varied from the last one, and get pretty darned close on the first print. A couple of 4x5 or so test prints and you'd be good on the new one.

hrst said:
I have had EXACTLY the same filtration with one liter of 2 year old developer used at least in 10 sessions during those 2 years, in a tray, producing at least 50 prints of 8x10" size, probably even more! This seems to be true for both Tetenal "room temperature" developer (45 - 60 seconds) and KODAK RA-RT developer (2:00 - 2:30). Furthermore, these two produce almost identical results with same filtration. I don't know about Fuji but it should be identical enough.

I think something is going on with that Jobo. I used to drum process Ilfochrome prints in Jobo, as it is often stated that it's the "only way" and Ilfochrome chemicals should be used one-shot (probably just one more internet legend, but oh well, due to the smell of Ilfochrome bleach, I was happy not to do it in open trays). But I wouldn't do any other process in drums. I think that drum processing is wasting time, effort and chemicals. Especially for RA-4, where you only need three trays and the chemicals are very resistant against oxidation.

How are you maintaining temperature control for RA4 in trays? A water bath and...aquarium heater maybe? I'd jump back into RA4 except that I haven't exactly puzzled out how to best maintain temperature in trays, the few Nova slot processors that have come up on eBay go for absurd prices (save one I just plain missed out on ) and I hate the wash/dry the drum cycle with drum printing, especially since I don't currently have running water in my darkroom. A big 7 gallon container of water with a faucet on it and a holding bath are workable if annoying for black and white - not so much for color if every time I wash a print drums requires a run up and down the stairs to the bathroom.

Photo Engineer · May 28, 2012

Reversal print materials are built to a contrast of about 1.0 but negative print materials have a contrast of about 2.5 and thus you have a severe contrast problem if you cross process negative materials. Add to that the fact that the process is not optimum in any case for cross processing and you have some severe chances of high Dmin, mottle, and crossover. I was never able to fix all of these in one simple process, but I was able to minimize them all. I stuck to landscapes and nature photos and things went just fine. If I went to portraits the results varied from quite bad to just barely acceptable.

I had several people send me sample landscape prints that were excellent and I have one large print of my own on the wall here. So, if you stick to suitable subjects you can get very good results, otherwise I suggest that you avoid this cross process.

See examples on Photo Net posted by a variety of people including Bujor B. He has also used Endura in-camera to get some excellent positive images using this process. He had to use a lot of filtration IIRC.

PE

hrst · May 28, 2012

How are you maintaining temperature control for RA4 in trays?

This is an easy one - I just don't maintain it!

It has never been colder than 21-22 deg C in the darkroom I use, but naturally, in the summer, the temperature has been up from this point. I have never noticed any differences in prints. Maybe you should avoid temperatures below 20 deg C and maybe you can shorten the development time when it's hot. Anyway, the temperature seems to have minimal effect in color balance (filtration), which is a bit surprising.

Roger Cole · May 28, 2012

hrst said:
This is an easy one - I just don't maintain it!

It has never been colder than 21-22 deg C in the darkroom I use, but naturally, in the summer, the temperature has been up from this point. I have never noticed any differences in prints. Maybe you should avoid temperatures below 20 deg C and maybe you can shorten the development time when it's hot. Anyway, the temperature seems to have minimal effect in color balance (filtration), which is a bit surprising.

That's interesting. I know you can use Kodak RA4 developer without the starter at room temperature, but also read some difference of opinion here with some saying Kodak paper worked well with this and Fuji not as well - I believe you have good results with Fuji CA? More important is the question of consistency. Do you vary the development time with temperature?

Reversal RA-4 experiment thread.

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency