color paper?

[false_Aesthetic]

So I'm thinking it'd save me a bunch of $$ if I shot color paper 8x10 instead of color neg. esp. since i've got access to a RA4 processor and I don't tend to shoot things that move. At least, until I get a better feel for my new toy.

Here's my questions:

1) color film has an "orange" base. This makes me think that if I don't put an orange filter over the lens I'll end up with a really blue image (obviously I can correct this in photoshop). Is this thought correct? Anyone have an idea of what filter might come close to this "film orange?"

2) matte, luster or glossy paper?

3) ISO? I'll be using Fuji Crystal Archive.


Anyone have any other thoughts?

T?

[Greg Lockrey]

Don't forget about color temperature of the light vs enlarger light. Paper is very slow. Why use paper for negatives?

[Stephen Willard]

If you really feel color paper is your answer, then I would recommend Fujiflex Crystal Archive. This has been referred to as Super Gloss Fuji paper. It uses a polyester base rather then a resin coated base. The surface of this paper has a mirror-like smooth surface, and thus, produces incredible sharp images. In contrast, resin coated papers have a much courser surface and do not render an image as sharp as Fujifex. Polyester papers are extremely durable and a have smaller expansion coefficient then its resin coated sister.

The down side is as follows:

1. It is about three times more expensive.

2. Fuji now only sells it in rolls. I just bought a 40"x120' roll for $685 I think.

3. When it is wet the emulsion will scratch very easily.

4. When it is wet finger prints will easily etch into the emulsion and are impossible to remove.

I have overcome all of these short comings except the price, of course.

[false_Aesthetic]

Stephen,

You're thinking of FujifFLEX Crystal Archive. You're totally right about the paper. However, I want to use plain ol' Fuji Crystal Archive which is about $30 for a box of 100 8x10. This paper comes in matte, luster and glossy (not as glossy as poly based paper though)

----

My main reason for shooting color paper would be that it's hella cheaper than color film.

A box of 10 160s 8x10 is almost $80, plus processing. A box of 100 color paper is $30 . . . and processing is free--we've got a 40" Colex processor running 6 days a week here.

----

Thanks

T

[Nick_3536]

Do a search. It's been discussed in various ways. RA-4 and Ilford.

You need to deal with the current "daylight".

Some one on Photo.net had some interesting stuff like this.

[bob carnie]

This process works with direct positive papers *ciba* . the amount of filtering needed and testing is quite extensive if you are trying to achieve correct colour.
FCA is a colour negative paper , which is designed to work from negatives, therefore I would think you are going to get some type of muted reversal of the original scene, I guess you could then contact the paper negative back to FCA and then process.
Sounds like a lot of work and sacrafice of quality to save some $$$.
But if it is art then fill your boots.


Stephen,

You're thinking of FujifFLEX Crystal Archive. You're totally right about the paper. However, I want to use plain ol' Fuji Crystal Archive which is about $30 for a box of 100 8x10. This paper comes in matte, luster and glossy (not as glossy as poly based paper though)

----

My main reason for shooting color paper would be that it's hella cheaper than color film.

A box of 10 160s 8x10 is almost $80, plus processing. A box of 100 color paper is $30 . . . and processing is free--we've got a 40" Colex processor running 6 days a week here.

----

Thanks

T

[David A. Goldfarb]

Are there any RA-4 papers that don't have printing on the back? If there is printing on the back, then it will print through to the print, unless you split the emulsion from the base, which I've done with some B&W RC papers, haven't tried it with color.

Just to make life complicated, you'll need to reproduce the orange mask both when exposing the paper neg and the pos, I would think. Maybe you could just use one sheet of unexposed, developed color film as a filter for this purpose. Unless this produces some really interesting results it sounds like more trouble than its worth.

[Nick_3536]

To me the idea of doing this is sort of like cross processing.

If you're tied into knots looking for perfect natural colour then it's not worth it. OTOH if you're looking to make one offs then it's different.

[roteague]

My main reason for shooting color paper would be that it's hella cheaper than color film.

Perhaps, you need to reflect on whether LF is right for you or not. LF is not cheap, by any means.

[Ron Mowrey]

This is very easy to do if you use an RA compatible color paper. It takes the use of heavy orange filtration to make the paper behave properly. Look at color paper as being an ISO 25 tungsten film (after filtration) and adjust accordingly using the orange filter.

Then cross process it.

I have posted processing instructions on Photo Net and also have helped a host of others cross process RA color paper. Bujor B on PN has some very nice reversal prints done this way and has posted his results.

Ron Mowrey

[false_Aesthetic]

Ron,

Thanks!!!!

Now I don't have to "reflect on whether LF is right" for me!
T.

[Nick_3536]

Look at color paper as being an ISO 25 tungsten film (after filtration) and adjust accordingly using the orange filter.


Ron do you mean it's EI 25 without a filter? Or that it's that speed after sticking an orange filter on? Wratten 21 too red? #16 better?

[Ron Mowrey]

Ok, regarding speed, speaking just of Kodak Endura paper, the blue sensitive lyer has an ISO of about 200, the green about 100 and the red about 25. It is tungsten balanced. With a tungsten balance filter (orange) over the lens, you get about 25.

Reversal (cross) processing will give a nice transparency (see pics and process on PN), that is flipped due to the optics.

Then you trim the balance just a tad with CC filters.

Ron Mowrey

[Nick_3536]

Okay an Wratten 85C. Got it.