Switching to Fuji CA after loss of endura?

apconan · Apr 5, 2010

Is anyone planning to switch to Fuji papers for optical printing? Endura is quickly running out around here...
I've heard about the Fuji being difficult to work with at room temperature? Although this shouldn't be an issue for me because I now have access to a darkroom with a print processor.

It'd be interesting to hear from people who have experience printing on both, or even if you haven't, but have some knowledge on the topic.

Thanks,
Conan

hrst · Apr 5, 2010

I've made some prints on Fuji CA without any problems with Tetenal room temperature kit; however, my experience is quite limited, about 10 prints on Fuji CA. And, it's about two years ago, the paper might have changed since then, who knows.

apconan · Apr 6, 2010

129 views and one reply? [thanks hrst, i appreciate it]

anybody else have experience with fuji archive?

sepiareverb · Apr 6, 2010

I've had good success with the room temp RA4 Kit and CA as well, though I've found CA consistently a little more difficult to print on. Practice though may be all I need.

Tom Taylor · Apr 6, 2010

I've been printing with CA Type C glossy for over a year now with great results in either a roller transport or Jobo. My only "complaint" is that I fin it necessary to stop way down to get a reasonable length exposure. For example, my last print was at f32 to get a 9 second exposure. But I suppose that all the color papers are the same as they are optimized for digital exposure and the laser light is probably stronger than that projected by the enlarger.

L Gebhardt · Apr 6, 2010

I've been using CA for a while and I like it more than Endura. I use a print processor so I have no idea on room temp development.

frotog · Apr 6, 2010

Fuji's current catalogue lists five different papers for RA4. Super type C and PD are specifically designed for digital exposure. Then there's CA type II which was released in 2005 expressly for use with laser exposure, although optically compatible. Type PIII, which I've printed on within the last year, is like the CA type II but not as saturated. Recently Fuji released CA preferred which they bill as optically compatible. I have yet to get my hands on it although I hear this is what LTI in nyc is pushing analogue-insistent photographers towards since the demise of Supra. My experience with the designed for digital exposure but optically compatible papers has not been good - noticeable highlight crossover makes it virtually impossible to get a neutral color print without using colored gels to dodge and burn one's way through this problem. I suspect that those who are not complaining about this must not have much experience with color correction. I've recently stockpiled the old supra and won't get around to testing various fuji alternatives until 2/11 (when my several cases will have expired). As someone who has become accustomed to the kodak palette I'll be looking for the least bad.

bob100684 · Apr 7, 2010

frotog said:
Fuji's current catalogue lists five different papers for RA4. Super type C and PD are specifically designed for digital exposure. Then there's CA type II which was released in 2005 expressly for use with laser exposure, although optically compatible. Type PIII, which I've printed on within the last year, is like the CA type II but not as saturated. Recently Fuji released CA preferred which they bill as optically compatible. I have yet to get my hands on it although I hear this is what LTI in nyc is pushing analogue-insistent photographers towards since the demise of Supra. My experience with the designed for digital exposure but optically compatible papers has not been good - noticeable highlight crossover makes it virtually impossible to get a neutral color print without using colored gels to dodge and burn one's way through this problem. I suspect that those who are not complaining about this must not have much experience with color correction. I've recently stockpiled the old supra and won't get around to testing various fuji alternatives until 2/11 (when my several cases will have expired). As someone who has become accustomed to the kodak palette I'll be looking for the least bad.

When I spoke to a fuji rep, the party line is basically, "fuji CA preferred=fuji CA II on a thicker base with gold backprint instead of grey". Same Idea as Kodak royal vs. Edge, though I think there is a difference between those too other than base thickness.

RobertV · Apr 7, 2010

I used Kodak Ultra and switched to Fuji CA using in the past, K43 (Amaloco) RA-4 low temperature and switching over to RA-4 high temperature because K43 and Amaloco is finished. I am working with a Thermaphot ACP252 processor, 2 bath 25 cm wide.
CA is a nice paper for working with. A bit more glossy on the RA-4 high temperature chemicals.

best regards,

Robert

Tom Kershaw · Apr 7, 2010

Robert,

I thought the FCAII paper was a distinct product that requires a new chemical process, not compatible with the Kodak RA standard.

Tom

RobertV · Apr 7, 2010

I was using Kodak Ultra III F (Glossy) 20x25cm/8x10" cat. 380 8847 and I have now Fujicolor CA paper G (Glossy) 20x25cm/8x10" cat. 432-259, made in the Netherlands, Tilburg.

Same type of packings: 100 sheets.
I always use a N.D. 0,6 (Neutral Density) filter when printing RA-4 to prevent too short exposure times.

Greetz,

Robert

frotog · Apr 7, 2010

Tom Kershaw said:
Robert,

I thought the FCAII paper was a distinct product that requires a new chemical process, not compatible with the Kodak RA standard.

Tom

FCAII is an RA4 paper. What other process would it be?

nh1o1o · May 17, 2010

Hi Frotog. have to say i only joined APUG to find out more with regards to the color paper situation. Yes I do agree with you, and as a very experienced color printer the fuji papers do not come close to Kodak supra at all. I am curious to try the other papers you mentioned P III and CA preffered. I will run tests on both very shortly.
A quick question. did you try different film types on these fuji papers or just the usual ones that you normally print with on the supra.
If you know anyone at Fuji please pass on the info to me as I have done comparison between the kodak supra and fuji Crystal Archive type C. and I have to say that paper is a joke.
I am probably one of the only commercially working photographers in nyc that prints all his own work, so its been a tremendous blow to me, and I`m very much in need of a replacement.

DanielStone · May 17, 2010

nh1,

just out of curiosity, do you have a website?

-Dan

nh1o1o · May 17, 2010

Hi Dan. i just emailed you

2F/2F · May 17, 2010

frotog said:
Fuji's current catalogue lists five different papers for RA4. Super type C and PD are specifically designed for digital exposure. Then there's CA type II which was released in 2005 expressly for use with laser exposure, although optically compatible. Type PIII, which I've printed on within the last year, is like the CA type II but not as saturated. Recently Fuji released CA preferred which they bill as optically compatible. I have yet to get my hands on it although I hear this is what LTI in nyc is pushing analogue-insistent photographers towards since the demise of Supra. My experience with the designed for digital exposure but optically compatible papers has not been good - noticeable highlight crossover makes it virtually impossible to get a neutral color print without using colored gels to dodge and burn one's way through this problem. I suspect that those who are not complaining about this must not have much experience with color correction. I've recently stockpiled the old supra and won't get around to testing various fuji alternatives until 2/11 (when my several cases will have expired). As someone who has become accustomed to the kodak palette I'll be looking for the least bad.

FWIW, some of my favorite big color prints that I have made are on Super Type PD, so it works just fine for optical exposures.

nickandre · May 17, 2010

That's why the good lord invented the refridgerator.

andrewkirkby · May 18, 2010

Endura seems to be readily available here in Australia and we tend to be the "bottom of the earth" where product availability is concerned.

frotog · May 18, 2010

nh1o1o said:
Hi Frotog. have to say i only joined APUG to find out more with regards to the color paper situation. Yes I do agree with you, and as a very experienced color printer the fuji papers do not come close to Kodak supra at all. I am curious to try the other papers you mentioned P III and CA preffered. I will run tests on both very shortly.
A quick question. did you try different film types on these fuji papers or just the usual ones that you normally print with on the supra.
If you know anyone at Fuji please pass on the info to me as I have done comparison between the kodak supra and fuji Crystal Archive type C. and I have to say that paper is a joke.
I am probably one of the only commercially working photographers in nyc that prints all his own work, so its been a tremendous blow to me, and I`m very much in need of a replacement.

Hi, NH1, welcome aboard! I'm one of the holdouts as well...in fact probably know you from the old printspace days before 9/11 as I would frequently print my own film from editorial assignments at their facility as the commercial labs would never massage the print quite right. Now I have a color drkrm. 2 hours north of nyc and a chest freezer full of supra (exp. 1/2011) and a ton of hours of printing to do before that cache turns yellow. You're right about type C. It is not a viable alternative. Type PD is the least bad but nowhere near as neutral-biased, low contrast as supra and definitely lacking in gamut. Beyond that there are DNP and kodak edge or royal. I have 11" rolls of all three of the aforementioned but I'm too busy printing portfolios to figure out which paper will be my workhorse after all the supra's gone. I have a distinct feeling that I'll relegate RA4 to proofing using one of the Kodak commercial papers and end up jumping ship by making (or jobbing out) hi-res. scans for inkjet output for all the critical work. I'm dreading how time-consuming and costly scanning and inkjetting are compared to RA4 printing but what other option is there? I have to chuckle to myself when people write posts saying it's no big deal, just use the digitally optimized stuff - they must be developing in trays at room temperature or something

I'm leaving on assignment shortly and will not be back until first week of July. If you're interested in coming up and experimenting with various papers when I return let me know (I'm not far from the last metro north stop). I have two big color Dursts and a closed loop Beseler head in a climate controlled drkrm. with an auto roll paper cutter (makes it easy to deal with the rolls) and 20" wide machine running kodak RA4 chem. There is small stable of photogs (all fine art/academic) from NYC who make the trip up mostly because they're fed up with how lame the rentals have become (not to mention all the good beer that flows in this studio).

MartinP · May 18, 2010

Drat, I have just got the idea to print RA4 as well as b+w, and apparently just missed the last Endura at the stockist I was intending to use. Now I have a choice of CA or CA, hmmmm. If anyone has actual stockcodes from Fuji for something that was successful then it would be handy, as there are various names in various markets (possibly a.k.a. I'm not sure what I should be looking for now).

Initially I'll be printing approximately 10x8 in trays on a dishwarmer - though I do have a big drum and a Jobo, that seems a lot of hassle after b+w. Chemistry will be Kodak RT/LU 5 Ltr packaging (not all made up at once). Hopefully this will get me in the right area at least.

Edit: I'm in the Netherlands, if that makes a difference for availability of paper

DanielStone · May 18, 2010

just don't buy this paper, whatever you do , its Agfa, but look closely at the pictures, notice anything wrong?

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=260403300337&_trksid=p2759.l1259

-Dan

frobozz · May 19, 2010

That auction has been up there for a while, and to be fair the text does explain that you'll only be getting one roll, since the opened one is ruined. I don't understand why they don't just shoot new pictures of the one roll and make the auction less confusing!

Duncan

nh1o1o · May 20, 2010

Hi Frotog! Many Thanks for the offer, and yes I`m still at print space for my color. so I`m sure paths have crossed. Likewise I`ve stashed 30 boxes of supra away, but I`m sure to burn through. ( I believe at present both Adorama and K&M still have a small amount of supra as they were promised and received shipments) I`m very curious about the papers you mentioned and I will be looking out for them. Thanks for the info. And yes maybe take you up on the offer : )
Have a good trip and speak soon!

schlger · May 21, 2010

Compatibility of Kodak negatives with Fuji CA?

I just wanted to start printing my own CN on Endura Supra. I have taken a lot of photos last year on CN Kodak Portra films. Now I probably have to choose the Fuji CA paper. How does that paper react to the dyes of Kodak films? And you experienced printers: How would you describe the difference of Supra to CA?
Its a shame that now I have gathered all the tools, Durst Pictochrom, Thermaphot developing machine, BBS compact videoanalyzer, ... Kodak no longer supports optical printing.

Thanks for sharing your exerience!
Gerhard

Switching to Fuji CA after loss of endura?

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency