Starting Color Filtration for Minolta MOD3 Enlarger

[mklw1954]

I want to use my Minolta MOD3 enlarger for color prints for the first time, after using it for b&w prints for the last 3 years. I know there are a lot of variables but can anyone provide their experience with Magenta and Yellow settings. I realize these would be starting values. I want to minimize waste by having some sense of where to start. For the last 4 years I have been doing color prints on an Omega B22 XL with a Chromega B Dichro lamphouse but now would like to use the Minolta.

I use Fuji Crystal Archive Type II paper; most negatives are are 120 Kodak Ektar 100, 135 Kodak Ultramax 400, and 135 Fuji Superia 400, developed myself using Unicolor powder kits.

 

[Paul Howell]

I have not printed color in many years, but in past Kodak and GAF printed the starting color filter set on the package. As I plan on printing color negative in the near future I hope this remains the case.

 

[rpavich]

I want to use my Minolta MOD3 enlarger for color prints for the first time, after using it for b&w prints for the last 3 years. I know there are a lot of variables but can anyone provide their experience with Magenta and Yellow settings. I realize these would be starting values. I want to minimize waste by having some sense of where to start. For the last 4 years I have been doing color prints on an Omega B22 XL with a Chromega B Dichro lamphouse but now would like to use the Minolta.

I use Fuji Crystal Archive Type II paper; most negatives are are 120 Kodak Ektar 100, 135 Kodak Ultramax 400, and 135 Fuji Superia 400, developed myself using Unicolor powder kits.

In my (limited) experience, there isnt any meaningful answer to this question. Everything makes a difference; chems, filters, paper batch, enlarger lamp, and nobodys numbers will match what you need.

Just dial in a guess and start. 50Y, 50M.

Its as good as any other guess.

 

[Neal]

Whenever I've been away from color printing for a long time I dial in 50M & 75Y to start.

Good luck,

Neal Wydra

 

[bvy]

50M+50Y is a good place to start. Or 75M+75Y which is more in the ballpark around which I'm getting good prints. I print on Fuji Crystal Archive and use Kodak Ektacolor chemicals. Pick a well exposed scene shot in good consistent light (preferably outdoors) to start with. Also, pick a film that you shoot a lot of or plan on printing a lot of.

 

[rpavich]

50M+50Y is a good place to start. Or 75M+75Y which is more in the ballpark around which I'm getting good prints. I print on Fuji Crystal Archive and use Kodak Ektacolor chemicals. Pick a well exposed scene shot in good consistent light (preferably outdoors) to start with. Also, pick a film that you shoot a lot of or plan on printing a lot of.

Just to clarify; I believe that the film doesn't matter. What you are actually balancing is the paper, chems, and enlarger light source when you adjust the filter pack.

If you shot a grey card with two different films but in exactly the same light and all other elements in the printing chain were the same, then they'd balance exactly the same.

 

[Paul Howell]

Does Fuji post a started pack on each packet of paper?

 

[rpavich]

Does Fuji post a started pack on each packet of paper?

I use rolls and I haven't seen one.

 

[mklw1954]

Does Fuji post a started pack on each packet of paper?

No, Fuji doesn't provide this.

I'll try 50M/50Y or 75M/75Y. At least with my experience with the Omega I should be able to correct more quickly.

 

[MattKing]

The reason that colour paper used to have starting filtration information packaged with it was that one could compare the new recommendation with your last package's recommendation, and then adjust your normal filter settings accordingly.
In other words, it made it easier to adjust your setup for changes in the paper from batch to batch.

 

[RPC]

Just to clarify; I believe that the film doesn't matter. What you are actually balancing is the paper, chems, and enlarger light source when you adjust the filter pack.

If you shot a grey card with two different films but in exactly the same light and all other elements in the printing chain were the same, then they'd balance exactly the same.

There can be quite a difference between films. Different films can have different dye sets used in their emulsions with different spectral characteristics. Looking at different films, you can see differences in the orangeish color which will affect color balance. There can even be differences from batch to batch of a given type of film affecting its color balance. The age of the film and storage can affect its balance, as can the processing. The color temperature of the light shot under makes a difference (as noted). There are probably more potential differences in the film than anything else.

 

[rpavich]

There can be quite a difference between films. Different films can have different dye sets used in their emulsions with different spectral characteristics. Looking at different films, you can see differences in the orangeish color which will affect color balance. There can even be differences from batch to batch of a given type of film affecting its color balance. The age of the film and storage can affect its balance, as can the processing. The color temperature of the light shot under makes a difference (as noted). There are probably more potential differences in the film than anything else.

Well, like I said, not in my experience (which admittedly isn't extensive.) The film makes no difference at all. The ONLY time I have to change my calibration is if the paper changes, the chems change or the enlarger bulb gets changed. I can move from film to film without re-calibrating.

 

[OzJohn]

Well, like I said, not in my experience (which admittedly isn't extensive.) The film makes no difference at all. The ONLY time I have to change my calibration is if the paper changes, the chems change or the enlarger bulb gets changed. I can move from film to film without re-calibrating.

Perhaps your relative inexperience with colour printing is the reason for this perception but I doubt than anyone who has printed colour extensively would agree except in the case of certain films from the same manufacturer, some of which were in fact the same emulsion under different labels. Commercial printing machines like minilabs had programmable channels for different brands and film types and the later machines even sensed the film type from the barcodes along the film edge. All this was done to print on a single long roll of paper with the minimum number of reprints. Without channels the wastage rate would have been much higher.

 

[RPC]

Rpavich, my experience is extensive and quite different from yours. I have no change with chems as I only use Kodak and all my boxes of Kodak Endura paper has the same balance or very close balance. Going from Kodak to Fuji CA II has a large change, but little or no change with Fuji from box to box.

However, as I go from one film to another of recently shot films as well as those I have shot over the years, and from others, I routinely have to make adjustments in the filter pack for the reasons mentioned earlier.

 

[rpavich]

Perhaps your relative inexperience with colour printing is the reason for this perception but I doubt than anyone who has printed colour extensively would agree except in the case of certain films from the same manufacturer, some of which were in fact the same emulsion under different labels. Commercial printing machines like minilabs had programmable channels for different brands and film types and the later machines even sensed the film type from the barcodes along the film edge. All this was done to print on a single long roll of paper with the minimum number of reprints. Without channels the wastage rate would have been much higher.

Well, like I said, that's not my experience at all. But it's not worth arguing over for me. It's just a side topic on this thread.

 

[rpavich]

Rpavich, my experience is extensive and quite different from yours. I have no change with chems as I only use Kodak and all my boxes of Kodak Endura paper has the same balance or very close balance. Going from Kodak to Fuji CA II has a large change, but little or no change with Fuji from box to box.

However, as I go from one film to another of recently shot films as well as those I have shot over the years, and from others, I routinely have to make adjustments in the filter pack for the reasons mentioned earlier.

Strange.
I can get my analyser calibrated for one roll of paper and then move to a different batch of paper and though the calibration won't be THAT far off, it will not be exact, it will be anywhere from a few filter points to a dozen different. I'm basing that I getting grey test strips using the analyzer for Y, M, and C percentages and density. The prints can look similar but in truth, they won't be the same.

In any case, as I said to the other commenter, it's not that important, I just mentioned it in passing and I'm not that keen on doing the internet defense of how I print. Folks can do what they want and it won't bother me.

I'm thankful for such a good group of folks and a good knowledge base here on the apug.

 

[bvy]

I was skeptical too, but in Bob's (@rpavich) defense, there is some reason to believe that all daylight balanced films are designed to be equivalent in terms of filtration. In theory anyway; in practice I haven't been so lucky.

See PE's comments here.
(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

 

[RPC]

bvy, I recall that thread, and was a bit puzzled by what PE said, but if you read what others said it more closely parallels my experience, and apparently yours, too.

All the factors I discussed earlier are potentially at work, and have been for at least the last 35 years I have been color printing!

 

[rpavich]

If I can clarify my comment, maybe I'm not clear enough...here goes.

All things being exactly the same; the film will take the same filter pack. Now...all things being the same/equal is a big statement. What I mean is: After I zero/calibrate to get a perfect neutral grey with a reference negative and come up with a filter pack value (pretend Y50 M50) then if my chems don't change and my paper is from the same batch and my enlarger light doesn't change, then I can use Y50 and M50 all day long to make a grey test strip from that reference negative; i.e. the film is the same.

Now, that doesn't mean that each shot takes the same exact filter pack even from the same roll...far from it.

It does mean that IF I have a reference shot (expodisc) from one roll of film and I take another reference shot using the expodisc in exactly the same light with the same camera settings then the filter pack between those two films will be identical and produce a grey test strip. The difference won't be the film itself, it will be the lighting difference or the other stuff I mentioned above.

I hope that clarifies what I meant. (Mick) from New Zealand here on the APUG can vouch for that.