What kind of RA-4 paper and chemicals would you recommend

[Chan Tran]

As I have decided to go with tube processing at room temp what kind of paper and chemical would you recommend. I used to use Kodak Endura but I guess they don't make them in sheets any more. I generally use 8x10 sheets in glossy finish. Also Kodak chemicals are not recommended to be used in room temp I think.

 

[BMbikerider]

The only paper that is available in sheets is Fuji, so the choice is made for you. I use Kodak Ektacolor RA4 which is designed to be used at 35 degrees C but with experimentation it can be used at 20C. The processing times are longer - a lot longer.

 

[bvy]

Well, there's Fuji Crystal Archive, and there's Fuji Crystal Archive. The choice is yours.

Seriously, there are "dealers" that cut and repackage the Kodak paper. I've heard mixed reviews, so you're on your own there.

Doesn't Arista make a color paper in sheets?

Anways, I'm getting good results from the Fuji paper in the Kodak RA/RT chemicals. I'm processing at 94F in drums.

 

[pentaxuser]

If someone no less than PE says you can use Kodak chemicals at room temp then you can use Kodak chemicals at room temp(20C). Development time is about 2 mins so not that long( Ilford paper and dev take 1 min)

I have tried it and it works fine

pentaxuser

 

[RPC]

Yes the Kodak chems work fine at room temp. I use trays and get good results with both Endura and Chrystal Archive II paper.

 

[DREW WILEY]

I gave up on "room temp" processing quite awhile ago. Inconsistent. I've standardized on one-shot
Kodak RA/RT at 82F, along with CAII paper (or any reasonably recent Fuji CA paper - the differences are minor, but I do like CAII the best).

 

[lhalcong]

Drew, if you don't mind what are the part numbers you use for Kodak RA/RT you mentioned ?

 

[polyglot]

The Kodak chems are great if you can get them, e.g. the 4x5L kits. There was a thread a while back that said room temp worked for Kodak papers but not Fuji; I can't confirm because I run it at 35C as recommended.

As an alternative to Fuji, Freestyle sells their Arista brand. I'm not sure if it's an older revision of FCA or whether it's from a different manufacturer, but I found it to work with basically the same filter settings as FCA. It doesn't have the Fuji printing on the back and the base isn't quite as white as the latest FCA, though you can only see the difference side-by-side and it's very very subtle. I also suspect it has a little less magenta/green crossover than FCA but can't be sure just yet.

 

[RPC]

I have not had any problems with consistancy at room temps with Endura but haven't used FCA enough to say whether room temperature variation may cause inconsistancies. But overall results are very close to Endura. When using at room temperature one should endeavor to keep developer temperature within a small range if consistancy is important. I would think though, that there would have to be more headroom at low temperatures than higher ones.

 

[DREW WILEY]

I standardize on 2 min dev (incl drain). That gives me plenty of consistency, yet is short enough so that the chem is not likely to drift significantly in temp in the drum (which is internally preheated by
a prewet phase of larger solution volume first).

 

[polyglot]

I standardize on 2 min dev (incl drain). That gives me plenty of consistency, yet is short enough so that the chem is not likely to drift significantly in temp in the drum (which is internally preheated by
a prewet phase of larger solution volume first).

The Kodak instructions say 0:45 (drum) to 1:00 (less agitation) will give you complete development...

 

[jgwetworth]

Arista, Fuji and ColorTone <-- Never tried it but will at some point.

 

[frotog]

I standardize on 2 min dev (incl drain). That gives me plenty of consistency, yet is short enough so that the chem is not likely to drift significantly in temp in the drum (which is internally preheated by
a prewet phase of larger solution volume first).

Yikes! No wonder why you think the new "digitally optimized" papers are essentially the same as the pre-digital versions.

 

[Roger Cole]

Well if it's a way to make them look like the older ones, why not? Nit so long as to be a real inconvenience.

 

[frotog]

So long as you're making crappy looking c-prints with a technique that precludes the possibility of fine color adjustment, then you're right - it makes no difference what paper you're using.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Look, you wise guys ... the reason for a 2 min dev time is so that the fill and drain time of the drum won't be such a factor as to make repeatability a nightmare (which 1 min dev will). And when I state
that some of these papers are only a tiny tweak different than the previous version, I mean it! Fuji will
tell you exactly the same thing if you bother to read the fine print and not just the marketing sheet.
I recalibrated from Super C to CAII with only about a 5cc change. Most of you can't even control your
colorheads within that amount of consistency. "Complete development" is related to time/temp, and
you have more than one potential option. There again, if you don't believe me, you can find that official
info from the respective chem mfgs. But I don't really care, because I've done thorough testing myself.
And once one of you learns to control color within vaguely 50% of the level my skills and equipment
can do it, I might listen to your comments. But you obviously haven't done your homework yet!