Lightjet prints on Endura

I have most of my LightJet prints made by WCI on Crystal Archive gloss more

than satisfactorily. Once in a while I need prints fast and I need to use a

UK lab that historically have been at least adequate with the same

printer/paper combination.

 

Today I looked at some proofs that were very dull, kind of heavy, and totally

lacked sparkle. The printer muttered that they were having to use Endura not

Crystal Archive. Question is whether, if properly profiled, this should be

making a lot of difference. Does Endura tend to give dull results or is it the

way this lab is using it? To the best of my knowledge all their several years

of LightJet use has been on Crystal Archive, so neither I nor I suspect they

have much of an idea what Endura is capable of.

adoramapix offers edura prints and custom color profiles, although they're in the US. I just

ordered about 100 5x7 prints from them and I won't call the end products dull. There were

very close to what I saw on my monitor.

there are several flavors of endura. Ultra allegedly has the highest contrast and therefore percieved saturation, Supra is sort of middle grade, and Portra is the flattest. I'm willing to bet portra endura looks flatter than FCA, and that Supra would probably match it.

I've had several lightjets made on it using a&i's profiles and have been disapointed every

time. The color just isn't there.

I still print using conventional darkroom. Endura does not give dull results compared to Crystal Archive.

It does depend on which flavor of Endura it is (Portra, Supra, or Ultra)... but I do recall Scott Eaton saying that none of them had as much raw saturation as Crystal Archive.

 

It stands to reason, however, that if this lab just recently switched to Endura from CA, they may not be that familiar with it and perhaps haven't yet figured out how to get the best results from it.

 

I've had a lot of shots printed on Royal, which would seem to be roughly comparable to Endura Supra, and I like it a lot. Metallic is really nice as well, especially if you want high gloss.

I know a lot of photographers on this board are infatuated with "pop" and high-contrast

products. Kodak EDGE and Crystal Archive may be high-contrast, but they also block up

the most tending to their higher contrast. THe finest tonalities and gradations can be

achieved with Portra. I'm printing a wedding and I'm using EDGE to proof and Portra to

print (all analog optical). I certainly prefer Portra because it gives me a lot more shadow

and highlight information than a corresponding print from EDGE. I can scan matched

samples comparing the two if anyone is interested. It's EDGE 8, not EDGE Generations, so

it's an older, and slightly expired, so it's results are going to be different than EDGE Gen,

but it'll give you an idea. I personally think Fuji's Crystal Archive is too heavy on the blues

and greens. I do have some PIII in 16x20 that I'm testing, and that seems better though. I

know this is all different with digital, as you have very flat looking files that tend to benefit

from a high-con paper. Just FYI, Kodak now also makes a special paper developer

designed to kind of force maximum blacks out of prints made from digital files, which

tend to clip at dark gray. It may benefit to find a lab that has switched to this new RA

developer. In any case, I wouldn't use either EDGE or Crystal archive for truly archival

copies. CA is only rated at 40 years, and EDGE at 18 (assuming daily exposure to room

light) They don't make good display copies. I'd recommend PIII for the best color

longevity.

 

Regards,

 

~Karl Borowski

Karl--what is PIII?

Sorry, Fuji P III is Fuji's professional low-contrast offering in the RA-4 market.

 

~Karl

<I>Kodak EDGE and Crystal Archive may be high-contrast, but they also block up the most tending to their higher contrast</i><P>Total BS. Somebody obviously is taking their lack of darkroom experience and applying it to their even greater lacking of emulsion technology. Next you'll be telling us Ink-Jet prints only last 5 years. <P>First, Kodak Edge is a nasty, high contrast, amatuer mini-lab paper - Fuji Crystal Archive isn't.<P>Kodak papers (and films) - all of them - will block high density colors before Fuji papers will because of differences in emulsion technology. Same applies to film. <P>Also note that nobody is using Endura Ultra in their LightJet printers because the paper doesn't magically have more color saturation than normal Endura. Just a lot more contrast to fake Kodak die hards using optical printers into thinking it does. <P>

 

You guys complaining about Endura notice how reds and magenta's lack sparkle and look muddy compared to Crystal Archive? Yup - that's Endura and Kodak's stable dye technology. You can fix some of this with a custom (read fudged) paper profile, but you still won't match the gamut of Crystal Archive.<P><I>Does Endura tend to give dull results or is it the way this lab is using it? </i><P>It's a wedding / prom / little league team pic paper that Kodak hypes because they finally caught up to where Fuji was 10 years ago in terms of dye technology, and they can sell it cheaper than Crystal Archive. The paper is fine for portraits and other subjects that don't require much gamut range, but when a few of my local labs tried to slip it in their Frontiers and LightJets we screamed bloody murder because it simply looks *FLAT*. About the only advantage Endura has is better density range, which makes it nicer for sepia or digital B&W prints. Crystal Archive doesn't have a really strong black unlike the Kodak materials.

<I>I personally think Fuji's Crystal Archive is too heavy on the blues and greens.</i><P>Considering neither dye exists in color paper, how can this be? Kodak now claiming they are formulating additive dyes in color paper?