Kodak Professional Endura Premier Paper

[Drew Wiley]

I print Kodak negs all the time on Fuji paper. There seems to be a big misunderstanding about what "digitally optimized" means. CAII refers to the class of dyes in use. Otherwise, there is quite a selection. Apparently, some cut sheet product for sale in the EU has in fact been cut from rolls really intended to digital automated
processing lines. The kind of Fuji-label cut sheet being sold by places like B&H and Freestyle (and also avail in big rolls) is engineered as DUAL-USE, both digital laser devices and optical enlargement. This is plainly specified on the tech sheets, if not the marketing sheets. Being improved for green laser response and contrast issues does not in any manner compromise these papers for optical printing. In fact, they're better than ever. Of course, fine-tuning negative contrast to a specific paper is always an issue with color neg printing, or any other kind of optical color printing. I don't know where you live in the Bay area. My studio is still under remodeling, but if you need to see a few example of CAII optically printed, I could probably bring them to my office here in Berkeley. This obviously doesn't
mean Fuji paper will be ideal for your own printing equip or subject matter. But it will give you a good impression of the quality of the paper.

[tgtaylor]

Thanks Drew but I bought a box of CAII a couple of weeks back from K&S. Part C in my RA-4 Developer kit went bad and I have 2 kits being delivered on Friday and I am currently 8 rolls (35 and 120) behind on printing + whatever I shoot this weekend. I bought a box of Kodak from frotog and looking forward to comparing the results.

Thomas

[Drew Wiley]

Yes. Please report back. I probably have to forego all color printing this season, just so I can finish painting the house before the hypothetical Nino, and get some
lab remodeling in too. The black and white stations aren't affected.

[frotog]

Once again, CA II is a specific emulsion used only on one Fuji paper product in the US - CA II. CA II is not a "class of dyes", nor is it the same thing as Drew's roll of Fujiflex that he continuously refers to. I'm not sure why there's all the deliberate obfuscation surrounding this fact.

CA II, as I've mentioned before, is fuji's least expensive paper product they sell. If you want to compare it to a kodak product, a fairer comparison will be kodak edge or royal, Kodak's two competing consumer products - equally as lousy for enlargement. Fuji CN is what the pro labs use when making exhibition quality prints. If you want to compare the premier to a similar quality Fuji product, you'd need a roll of Fuji CN. Nonetheless, in a comparison to Fuji CA II the most glaring differences will be dmax and saturation. The Fuji cut sheet product will pale in comparison to the kodak professional paper.

There are no light source tweaks one can do to their enlarger head to make these contemporary, digitally optimized papers work better under an enlarger. However, if you choose to use Fuji's current crop of papers, you'd be wise to educate yourself on what the fuji techs refer to as "latent image drift", a design compromise necessary to the engineering of an emulsion capable of full exposure under a millisecond blast of laser light. L.I.D. is accounted for in the laser light workflow and is therefore not a concern when the paper is used this way. However, latent image drift should be a concern for anyone seeking to use these papers under tungsten light should the operator stand a fighting chance at anything approaching a properly color balanced print. The fact that Fuji does not alert the consumer to this anomaly on the packaging of their sole product intended exclusively for darkroom hobbyists, Fuji CA II in cut sheets, is just further evidence of their regard for this niche of their consumer base, namely that they are merely hobbyists, more concerned with "doing photography" then making exhibition quality prints that demand subtle, repeatable changes to the color pack in their workflow.

How do you plan on processing your RA-4 paper, tgtaylor?

[Drew Wiley]

100% wrong again. Nearly all of Fuji's papers currently being coated are CAII. If you run into Type C or P, it's probably slightly older paper (and there's still plenty around still for sale - it keeps fairly well). The transition of Fujiflex into Type II was posted based on the batch code, with an official notice from Fuji when that was
(almost three years ago already). I've used both, and yes, they are a bit different. Dual-purpose papers are intended for typical enlarger times, not milliseconds. There is very little recip failure or filtration correction up till at least a minute (these papers expose fast, so I've never tested them beyond that). The biggest pro
lab in this area uses the same paper in both enlarger and wide-format laser printers, not to be confused with small economy "machine prints" or the roll products used in them (which you are totally confusing this with, Frotog). I don't think "hobbyists" are much interested big rolls of paper or the kind of equipment it takes
to process them. And I don't know why you keep disseminating total misinformation, Frotog. I'm certainly not going to criticize you for preferring one brand of paper over another. But you quite plainly have never even used the kinds of Fuji papers you condemn, and in fact, keep claiming don't exist. These products are
very high quality in terms of color reproduction and quality control. And I state this for the general readership. Otherwise, it's clearly a waste of time trying to
convince the Flat Earth Society.

[tgtaylor]

Kodak also refers to the latent image shift and, IIRC, cautions to process the paper with 24 hours. I don’t wait. I remove it from the easel and put it in the Jobo tank and process immediately in a Jobo CPA22 with Kodak RA-4 chemistry. The only difference between the digital and analogue methods is the light source which, in my case, is between the laser LEDs or whatever and my 250 watt Halogen bulb in a Besseler 45S color head.

Also, IIRC, Kodak advises to use an IR blocker. I don’t know if the digital light sources emit IR but I believe that the halogen does although it is shifted more to the blue than a regular incandescent bulb. Since I will be one of the very few still printing chromogenic C-prints, I’d like to perfect printing in this style as much as possible. Any suggestions would be appreciated.

Thomas

[Drew Wiley]

Latent image shift with the correct Fuji papers is negligible within 24 hrs. I doubt you could even measure it on a typical densitometer. Leaving the print after exposure in a dry processing drum or paper safe doesn't seem to have any side effect. I've never tested anything beyond a day later, however. The CAII products are very well corrected in this respect, just as they claim. I cannot speak for alleged IR sensitivity, except that ordinary halogen systems seem to be a non-issue.
Most colorheads with dichroic filtration seem to have a sufficient handle on that. I have yet to test the CAII products on my older Chromega colorhead, but based
on previous experience, I would not anticipate any problem. All my current work is done on my halogen additive (RGB) colorheads, though I'm about to install a backup 8x10 Durst unit with a subtractive halogen head (sometimes the additive system is just a bit too much in terms of clean color punch, esp with Ektar film).

[tgtaylor]

Hi William,

If you haven't already shipped the paper, please let me know. I would like to change the shipping address if you haven't already shipped it. If you did ship, please send me the tracking number so that I will know when to expect it.

Thanks,

Thomas

[frotog]

TGtaylor - Your paper already shipped to the original address you supplied me with. Please let me know that it arrives safely.

Drew - your willful ignorance on this matter is confounding as information regarding Fuji CAII as well as the rest of their product line is readily available to anyone who cares to navigate to it. CA II is only available in rolls up to 12" wide, sheets up to 20x24. Can you not read? See here... http://www.fujifilmusa.com/shared/bi...peII_Paper.pdf for sizes, surfaces and availability. Any questions, save it for a fuji rep and leave me out of it. I've already given my professional opinion on Fuji CAII. I've never tried the fujiflex, but if it's like their other professional papers (see original link for complete list) then it should be of comparable quality to Endura. If you need to tilt at windmills in order to regard yourself as the great apologist for analogue printing, then have at it but your bout of magical thinking regarding what's caii and what's not only serves to make you seem either thick-headed or downright loony.

So put down your lance, brave knight of the sorrowful countenance, and rest awhile...(while I look for the nearest exit from this conversation).

[Larry Kellogg]

I have used quite a bit of the Kodak paper and love it.

Larry