RA4 - how to get things right?

[pkr1979]

Hi all,

I just took some time off work to try to figure out how to do RA4 printing. I tried both in trays at room temp and in drums at 35 Celsius / 95 Fahrenheit.

I used the same neg and tried three times in trays. The film used is Kodak Portra 160.
All exposed at 2,5 seconds at f11, and then developed for 1 min 45 sec and blixed for 1 min 45 sec (probably a bit more for both).

Filtering for first: Y40, M50
Filtering for second: Y70, M50
Filtering for third: Y55, M50

With the same neg I also tried one time in drum at 35 Celsius / 95 Fahrenheit. I tried to follow the Tetenal instructions on timing counting from chemistries first contact with film until next bath... I had no chance in doing that. CD should have been 45 sec, stop for 15 sec and blix for 45 sec... my times was probably more like 60, 30 and 60 (at least)...
Filtering was Y55, M50 and exposed at 2,5 seconds at f11 (this came out to dark when using the same exposure - which probably shouldn't be a surprise).

Anyway, I shot this:

210272

And they came out like this:

210273

Top left is first: Y40, M50. Top right is second: Y70, M50. Bottom left is third: Y55, M50. Bottom right is from drum.

I also developed a negative of my daughter the same way and the third one developed in tray wasn't that off in terms of skin color/pleasing to the eye, which is why I tried the same filtering for drum developing despite knowing that the increased temperature would affect color... but I had no idea how much.

Im not really sure where to go from here. Regardless of the filtering alternatives and temp used red came out brownish on all four copies. But might that be a characteristic of Portra 160? If its not Id like to try to adjust this...

I find the ones developed in trays to look more faded then the one developed at 35/95 degrees in the drum... which I think has stronger colors/punch/contrast... but I dont know if this is due to increased temp solely or if it is the combination of increased temp and the spesific filtering. If higher temp in drums actually provides more color/contrast/punch... is there a way to compensate for this with trays?

I'll admit I'd rather do it in trays out of convenience and less stress... however, how important is timing for the various stages when developing the prints in drums at 35/95 degrees?

Also, Im not sure how important this is, but I used the regular Tetenal RA4 kit with trays, and the Tetenal Magic Box RA4 kit when using drums... I assume the chemistry is pretty similar though.

Whoever bothers to respond to this with some helpful advise I'll get a beer when in Oslo, Norway.

Cheers
Peter

[Ironage]

Just looking at your test exposures as they look on my ipad I can give you a guess but it depends of the digital scan which is another layer of complexity. They all look over exposed but the one in the drum is badly overexposed. Maybe even a full stop. 2,5 seconds is too short to be consistent with printing. Try stopping down to f16 and 4 seconds. The first exposure is too red, and the others are too magenta. Try Y30 M40. If the result is too blue go Y35 M45. Good luck. I just bought drums and a roller, and will be getting back into color next month.

[Drew Wiley]

Too short a printing time to be consistent, for sure. Most of that 2.5 sec would involved the color shift in the bulb itself as it warms up and fades back down. You want at least ten times as long an exposure. Otherwise, everything is coming out too magenta, which means you actually have to increase magenta to start balancing that back, this being a negative process. But that's hard to determine precisely unless you use a more reliable exposure time.

[pkr1979]

Thanks guys. Are both of you doing this in drums at 35/95 degrees? How particular are you about timing your baths?

[Ironage]

I have used the the Arista chemicals available in the US. It calls for 38 degrees. The warmer temps are easier for me to keep accurate. Drums are easier as well because keeping the solution at the correct temperature is also easier. The developer time needs to be consistent so follow the recommended times.

[Drew Wiley]

I standardize on 2 min 30C for Ra/Rt, drums various sizes, always one-shot usage. The Kodak, Arista, and Silver Pixel kits are chemically identical. Pre-rinse, about 30 sec, ample volume. Dev 2 min including 5 sec each load and drain. 1/2% acetic acid stop about 30 sec, but with drain I round it off to 1 min just for sake of keeping time more easily, likewise a total of 1 min plain water rinse after the stop, just to make sure no stop accidentally gets into the next step. Blix 2 min overall. Then I rinse in drum for 5 or 6 water changes of about 2 min each, significantly more time than specified, but way better washed, and that's what I want. I haven't even bothered plugging in my Thermaphot automated roller-transport processor. One more big hunk of junk at an estate sale when I croak.

[pkr1979]

Thanks guys - appreciate this :-)

[agregov]

Agree with the points on your exposure time is too short...you're in the reciprocity failure of the paper with too short times. I'd stay over 4 seconds. That said, I don't think that's the root cause of bad color casts. There's quite a bit you have left off your description that would be helpful. For example,

-What enlarger are you using with corresponding head?
-What type of rotary processor are you using and does it have a tempering bath?
-What type of paper are you using?
-Are you a beginner with RA4 printing or have you done it before in a color darkroom with processor?
-Are you color correcting on dry prints? Meaning, do you put your wet prints through a paper dryer before looking for color casts.

Some general notes based on my experience having used large 50" processors and at home a 14" Fujimoto as well as CPP3 for drum processing.

-Chemistry type shouldn't be a big deal but I'm only familiar with using Fuji RA4 professional chemistry. Fuji Digital RA Pro P1-R Developer Repl and Fuji CP RA P2-R Bleach Fix & Repl. Heating temp for me 35C.

-Between a 50" professional processor and my home 14" Fujimoto, I've noticed zero difference in quality of RA4 prints. Further, I've printed up to 20x24 prints in drums on my Jobo CPP3 and also have seen zero difference in quality from roller processors. The only difference I did notice with using the Jobo is the color pack on the enlarger will be different to get the same "color correct" print as with the processor. My theory is the drum spins and creates different agitation than a roller processor. Different agitation = different color casts.

-My development time in the processor per bath is about 45 seconds for each bath (developer, Blix, wash 1, wash2). My development time in the Jobo is 1 minute for each (as per Jobo's instructions). I gather the extra 15 seconds in the Jobo over the processor is to account for temperature loss of chemistry hitting a cooler drum and time needed to cover paper. Again, all of this is at 35C.

-I do not use one shot chemistry passes for RA4. I do when developing C41 film but with RA4 I replenish. Or simply use the same chemistry for say 10-20 8x10 prints (say about 1lt of chemistry) and the toss it or remove 500ml and add a fresh 500ml. If you want precise control of color casts, replenishment should be after every print processed (say 10-25ml). I'm not concerned with such high tolerances especially when making work prints.

-I believe RA4 does not require 35C. The cooler the chemistry, the longer your development and Blix time will be. The longer estimates in the thread sound about right.

-In my experience learning RA4 printing, the hardest part (for me at least) was learning how to see color casts and manipulating the color pack (head) in the enlarger. If you're starting out, I'd suggest some patience. Also, I wouldn't bother shooting color charts and starting there, rather as you describe, print real images and practice color correcting on those.

-Personally, I would stay away from tray processing. I'd probably print on inkjet before I'd head in the tray processing direction for analog color image making. If you'd like to make RA4 color prints, I'd get a Jobo and a RC paper dryer. You will get perfect prints that way. I think you'll be fighting quality in trays and longer development times will slow you down and get discouraging. Long term, finding a roller processor is the best. Yes, I know finding machines like Fujimotos in working condition is hard but it really is the best way to print RA4. I really enjoy the darkroom with the processor. I tolerate it with the Jobo (just not that fun). Can't imagine doing it with trays.

[koraks]

Exposure times of around 2-3 seconds are definitely on the short side because they're a bit difficult to reproduce depending on the equipment used. But they're not in reciprocity failure territory, especially not with today's RA4 papers. These are optimized for very short exposures to begin with!

[pkr1979]

Good evening,

And thanks :-)

I am using a Durst M670 Color. Ive been using both trays room temp (3 first), and a Jobo CPA2 (tempering bath at 35C) with lift and a Expert Drum 3005 (the 4th.). The paper is Fujicolor Crystal Archive Type II Luster.
Im completely new to this... and the prints where not completely dry when I looked for color casts (they were dry when I photographed them for illustration here).
I was doing real images too... I just added the color charts as I thought it might be helpful since its easy to compare to the chart.

Next I'll do longer exposure times with f16.

Cheers
Peter

[Drew Wiley]

Don't get frustrated. Just take each hurdle in turn. After awhile it becomes easy.

[pkr1979]

Thanks Drew - I'll keep that in mind ;-)

[agregov]

then developed for 1 min 45 sec and blixed for 1 min 45 sec (probably a bit more for both).

For processing in the Jobo, I'd go to 1M development times for your developer and Blix--that's as per Jobo's documentation. If you are not drying out your drum in-between processing runs, use a 30sec water bath in the drum, drain and then go to your developer run. A dry drum is not necessary for c-print processing. A quick wipe down of excess water with your Jobo sponge is enough.

The 3005 drum is probably not ideal for print processing. It's really designed for negatives. It would be better to get a print drum. Options here:

http://www.jobo-usa.com/images/manuals/tank_and_drum_capacities.pdf

If you squeegee your print, you're probably fine for ball park color correcting. If you stick with RA4 long term, it would be good to get a RC print dryer so you can go from dry to dry and then do your color correcting.

[Drew Wiley]

Jobo drums fill and drain slow, meaning the amount time involved doing that is going to be an undue proportion of your overall Dev step if you're in a hurry. Therefore I strongly disagree with agregov's advice above. My own drums fill and drain much faster than Jobo ones, even the big 30X40 inch one, and I still feel more comfortable with a full 2 min times. Anything less seems rushed. Jobo made some good products, for sure, but certainly didn't do everything right. And "official advice" or not, it doesn't make much sense.
And there is no need for a fancy print dryer. They can be air dried on ordinary fiberglass window screens just like black and white prints. To evaluate test strips, just briefly use a hair dryer or heat gun on low setting. Even small entire prints can be rapidly done that way. Big automated roller-transport processors are a different scenario because they potentially crank out prints much faster in relation to large volume printing, so automated dryers are often attached to the bigger units, but are also huge wattage consumers. Anyone using a drum is obviously not in that category.

[pkr1979]

The fill and drain time of the Jobo drums is why I tried with trays. With the 3005 drums you pretty much have to start draining as soon as youve filled it up. Particularly if you are timing as instructed by Tetenal... from papers first contact with chemistry until next first contact with chemistry/water. I agree agregov, a paper drum is probably better. And I do have paper drums with the paper lid... these may fill and empty faster. I’ll test it with water... Drew - what kind of drums are you using?

[Drew Wiley]

I have several kinds of drum, but the best were made by CPI, which are now very hard to find. But I've somewhat modified even these. They were made of Noryl rather than ordinary ABS; this is an expensive plastic which holds heat inside much better. Large sizes were also available.
They fill via fluid access to the entire rim rather than a small central port or funnel like Jobo. Even a big 30X40 drum can be filled with sufficient fluid with the drum rotating within about 5 seconds. Drain is equally fast. One could make their own analogous design if they have basic plastics skills.

[agregov]

I can't speak to using custom drums with Jobo processors. With respect to Jobo print drums, I've processed 20x24 prints in the large drums and you're only expelling 500ml of chemistry--less chemistry in smaller drums. It comes out almost instantly--most of your time is spent lifting and returning down the print drum. I think drum drain time is largely a non-issue. With respect to chemistry development times, I start with the manufacturer's recommendations. Comparing my own results processing in the Jobo versus professional grade RA4 processors, the Jobo recommended 1M dev/blix times showed perfect results so I saw no reason to change over Jobo's recommended time. Also, Fuji recommends 45sec develop/blix times for their chemistry in processors at 35C, therefore the Jobo recommendations are in the general vicinity and seem to take into account chemistry load/drain time at 1M. 2M+ dev times at 35C in a processor sound too long to me. But with the use of custom drums, those numbers could change. Finally, with respect to print dryers, in theory I suppose you don't need them. Like in B&W wet darkroom printing, you have dry down and no one worries about using a dryer with fiber prints. But when I work in a professional lab environment with high quality lighting board to review prints, doing serious RA4 color work you have to have dry prints to judge 1pt color shifts. Waiting for prints to dry and drying test strips by say a hair dryer aren't the same as viewing a full sized dry print next to your last print to diff results so you know where to go next. For casual work, Drew's suggestions are fine, that's why I suggested the RC dryer only if you get more serious about RA4 color printing. No sense in spending extra money for initial experiments. For high quality color work, you'll eventually want to go dry-to-dry.

[Drew Wiley]

My print standards are HIGHER than any commercial lab I've run into, and there were once a number of very big successful ones around here. The owners were even my friends. But no commercial lab can afford the time to do real home cookin', so to speak. I sometimes farmed out basic commercial output to labs, but never personal work. "Dry to dry" has absolutely nothing to do with it. I also want my personal RA4 prints washed much longer than roller-transport allows if they come out already dried. There are reasons I turned down a free mint condition Kreonite 50inch RA4 processor complete with dryer. Numerical volume is not my priority, quality is. Any more equipment myths?

[Michael R]

I don’t know, Kreonite was good enough for Christopher Burkett.

[Duolab123]

Everything that has been said is good advice. I would use your Jobo. Maybe get a couple 2830 tubes. I still use ancient Kodak drum processors, I run at 100F/38C. You are using a dichro colorhead, so the filters should be fine. Once you get on the target, just make small tweaks and write everything down in a notebook.

[Drew Wiley]

Michael - Kreonite is superb equipment. But Burkett did P3 Ciba, not RA4, which required a far more chemically-resistant machine with different timing. Ciba bleach is highly corrosive. But my drums do both equally well. I had my reason, he had his. Auto transport machines capable of bigger prints require a large volume of replenished chemistry.
That imposes some serious health as well as expense issues. I deliberately kept my print quantities well down for health reasons. Then just think about the utility bills. 80% of the cost and wattage goes to the dedicated dryer unit, and it is 240V. I have dual voltage in my lab, but certainly don't want to deal with the higher utility bills, the more complicated fume issues, or having to mix large volumes of chemistry.
All of those lab owner's I previously mention got sick. One had to have scar tissue removed from both his lungs. I could have taken over his lab. No thanks. Doing small quantities in drums is simply safer for personal purposes.
Once you go big there are also all kinds of hazmat and business license increased too. Yes, not being able to do large numbers lost me some pretty tempting sales; but so what? There are plenty of ways to make money; getting your health back is another story. With Ciba, even a big drum can just be dumped into a little bucket with some baking soda in the bottom, and the sulfuric acid bleach is instantly neutralized. With a big machine, it's a complicated headache and involves industrial zoning permits. That would be the case with every city around here; it's not like where Burkett lives. The entire Bay Area is tightly monitored. With RA4, I can actually run the drum outdoors and avoid most of the vapors. With a big machine, I'd have to have constant ventilation in a dedicated room. Etc ....

[Michael R]

Sorry yes you are right - as soon as a saw Kreonite I chimed in, forgetting this thread was about RA4 not Ciba.

My bad.

[Drew Wiley]

Well, I'm sad that Chris plans to throw in the towel once his supplies of Ciba run out or go bad. The Fuji Supergloss product is even better, but starts at the opposite end with either color neg film or an interneg. Maybe Chris is just at that point in life where he's thinking about retirement anyway. And frankly, converting to an equivalently high level of CN printing would probably involve at least fives years of relearning; and he's getting up there in years. I had a running start by doing both Ciba and RA4 parallel once I saw the handwriting was on the wall, and that Ciba was inevitably doomed. Commercial level RA4 printing is easy, but once one starts seriously fine tuning it with masking and so forth, all those masking protocols differ significantly from how it's done with Ciba.

[Michael R]

Indeed, it might simply seem too daunting for him to get into a much different workflow. He’s invested so much time and energy (not to mention cash) into his total mastery of Ciba. But who knows.

Incidentally apparently there are already images he will not print anymore in Ciba because of colour shifts.

[agregov]

"Dry to dry" has absolutely nothing to do with it.

Drew, no one doubts your knowledge in the forum, including myself. But why you would encourage a new c-printer that making color corrections on wet prints makes no sense to me. From Henry Hornstein's book on Color Photography: A Working Manual (pg169):

"Prints must be dry before they are evaluated because the density and color balance look quite different when prints are wet than when they are dry" ~ Henry Hornstein

Again, for the stage of experimentation this forum user is at with RA4 processing, your advice is fine. But discounting correct longer term advice if they choose to get deeper in color work will just end up confusing them and others that encounter this thread in the future. Or perhaps I just misunderstood what you were originally trying to suggest? Sorry if that's the case.

[Drew Wiley]

Michael - That was my concern when he made such large final purchases. Ciba develops crossover rather quickly. It simply won't store for long periods like RA4 chromogenic papers. I actually timed certain images based on the age of the paper. Highlight crossover went from greenish when the paper was new toward magenta as it got older. After about six months, overall shifts set in which rendered the Ciba paper relatively useless for high-quality applications. I actually used minor highlight crossover as an esthetic tool - not necessarily realistic, but subtle enough to look convincing. With my odds n ends of RA4 leftover paper, however, the shift even over several years is minor enough to be easily rebalanced on the color head, provided the paper is properly stored. But I'm not even printing RA4 right now or buying any new paper until this pandemic gets under control. I don't want any respiratory irritation at all.
So I'll have to be content with black and white printing for a few more months.

[Drew Wiley]

agregov - I always evaluate prints dry, every kind of print. But what I was stating is that it is really easy to quickly dry a print without fancy equipment. I once trained professional color matchers. I even have special very high color quality lamps at my retouching station, plus different kind of light sources available to replicate various display conditions. Even my colorheads are customized and more color accurate than the usual kind. I once earned income as a professional color consultant. And I have made quite a number of big prints. But there is nothing fancier than a variable-temp heat gun and a bunch of big fiberglass screens in my facility in terms of drying equipment. I actually threw out my drying cabinet because I never needed to use it. If somebody wants a special dryer, they can certainly buy or design one. But it has nothing to do with the quality of final output color. In fact, for really fussy work, I like to re-evaluate the print the next day before my eyes are fatigued (computer screen work is the worst for tiring out the eyes).

[pkr1979]

I tried filling and emptying the paper drums today just to see how long that took. I tried with both a 3063 expert drum and a 2830 drum. The kind of drum didnt seem to matter much (considering the entrance is the same for both drums it makes sense). For 500ml it takes pretty close to 10 seconds to fill it... and at least 10 seconds to empty it. The minimum amount of chemistry for the 2830 drum is 100ml and for the 3063 its 300... but going down to 250 would be closer to 5 seconds then 10 it wasnt that much quicker with 100ml (when filling). Also, if I filled to quick it would just come out the emptying hose. However, the lesser amount of fluid made a difference when emptying.

But when using the 3063 drum which requires 300ml you are pretty close to 20 seconds filling and draining combined.

This leads me to another question though... If I make test prints with 8x10" and find the proper exposure to be 4 seconds... is there a way to calculate the exposure for a 16x20"?

[Duolab123]

Go to Ebay and buy an old Kodak Color Darkroom Dataguide, it's got formulas for adjusting times based on several factors, filters etc.

[Drew Wiley]

You want to make your test exposure at the same magnification, with all the same setting of time and color balance, but just onto a smaller piece of paper. You could select just a representation portion of the 16X20 image to develop in the 8x10 drum. 16X20 will give you four 8X10 sheets per piece, which would make convenient test strips, for example.

Somebody might chime in (and just did) with a formula for computing the time change automatically when you scale up; or certain colorheads might have software to do that automatically; but here you're dealing with unrealistically short times starting out, so those kinds of formulas are unlikely to be reliable due to both reciprocity and the bulb color change factor warming up and cooling down, affecting about 2 sec or a whoppping 50% of your short exposure time! An electronic shutter could be fitted onto your enlarging lens to trim off that part of the cycle. But if you merely slow down the exposure to around 8 sec instead of 4 you'd alleviate the issue.

Isn't there any kind of neutral density scrim option built into your colorhead to slow the exposure down? If not, you could add your own. But don't confuse that with my primary advice regarding 16X20 prints themselves - get accustomed to simply making the equivalent of test strips from select portions of the full-sized magnification onto 16x20. That way there will be less rude surprises.

[pkr1979]

Ahem... I actually have that book... Thanks :-) But good point. I suppose its just as easy making test strips from a cut 16x20.

There is a thing under the lens I can move in front of it it I want to... I assume I can put a regular neutral density filter on that.

[Drew Wiley]

The problem with most neutral density filters is that they aren't truly neutral gray. Most have a greenish bias. So if you use an ND filter for just smaller prints, you should determine the color correction change with and without that filter. It's just so much easier and more reliable to apply exactly the same settings and parameters to both the smaller test strip or print, and the full sized one.

[pkr1979]

Will do - thanks Drew.