RA-4 at Home

[ben_hutcherson]

I'm toying with the idea of doing RA-4 at home. I've had people tell me in vague terms that it's "not that bad" but I don't have a lot of perspective. I see that the materials-both paper and chemistry-are available from Freestyle so I can at least get that(although paper isn't cheap). Freestyle even has the filters for my Thomas safelight in stock, so I can see what I'm doing with it.

 

I guess my first question would be-I'm sure there are some good publications on this, but I'm not sure where to look. Can someone suggest something?

 

My other questions would be-how feasible is tray processing? I do 4-tray now for B&W(develop, stop, fix, hypo clear plus a 5th tray for a "pre soak" before a running water rinse for FB) so I can deal with multiple trays. My biggest concern would be keeping them at elevated temperatures if that's needed-I suppose something like an aquarium heater could do that. Allternatively, do I just need to bite the bullet and get a Jobo?

 

Finally, I currently print on two different enlargers-a Focomat V35 with a color head for 35mm, and I use a Beseler 45MX for medium and large format. I could conceivably dedicate my now idle Beseler 23C to color work(I don't do C-41 in 4x5), although I'm looking to move it out instead. Both of my Beselers have the standard condenser heads. Would I be well served by finding color heads for them(or complete enlargers with color heads), or are the filter sets that Freestyle sells workable?

 

This may well be a crazy idea, but I enjoy working in the darkroom enough that this seems a logical next step to take. I just wish Cibachrome was still available new-I'd go that route instead.

[glen_h]

For developing, you can use a Unidrum, which is much less expensive than a Jobo.

 

I believe they were invented by Unicolor to keep the price down.

 

(The actual Unicolor invention is a color wheel with R, G, and B filters so

that you can do color balance without so many filters. But now it isn't so hard

to buy filter sets, if you have an above the lens filter drawer. Or buy a used color

enlarger for a low price.)

 

But you also have to get the exposure and color balance right, and those aren't so easy.

 

Color negative film has a low gamma (contrast), about 0.5. Color print paper has a

correspondingly high gamma to compensate, which makes it (about) twice as sensitive

to exposure and color balance than you might guess.

 

The way to adjust color after one print is to figure out the filters that you look

though will make it look right, choose the complementary color, and then divide

by two. That is, the effect is twice the filter change.

 

The assumption from the beginning of color printing is that it was done using

automated exposure adjustment, usually average over the whole print.

 

You will use up a lot of paper without at least an exposure meter.

 

Unicolor used to make a device with many little filters, that you put over

a (small) sheet of paper, put a diffuser over the lens, then expose.

The spots allow one to select the appropriate (average) color balance.

 

The Unidrum is designed to hold the temperature, and with only a small

amount of chemistry (one-shot amount) for one print.

[glen_h]

Years ago, I did some printing from slides, on Ektachrome 1993 paper, using

Unicolor PFS chemistry, and with only an exposure meter.

 

This does not have the gamma problem described above, so is much easier

to get the color balance right. But processing takes longer!

[Bill C]

I guess my first question would be-I'm sure there are some good publications on this, but I'm not sure where to look. Can someone suggest something?

 

Hi, I've never done it at home, but spent a great deal of my adult work life heavily involved with color neg film processing and printing. And when I say "heavily involved," it's probably understating.

 

For references, the industry "bible" for labs is Kodak Z-130 (I think; didn't confirm the number). It won't be directly applicable to tray processing, though.

 

For a lot of general "user" info, download (for free) Ctein's very good book, "Post Exposure: Advanced Techniques..." He has a brief section on "room temperature RA-4 processing. As I recall someone saying, the specific chemicals may not be available anymore, but the ideas are all applicable. Ctein is one of the relatively few people on the internet that I would trust.

 

Finally, download Kodak's J-39 publication, which has a short section on tray processing. This includes a table of development time vs temperature.

 

If I were gonna do it myself, at home, I'd probably do it in trays (assuming somewhere around 8x10 inch prints). You should get used to the idea of working completely in the dark; safelights only supply enough light to maybe find the trays. You should plan to develop by time, based on a temperature you can maintain. (Note: you absolutely do not wanna do this with FILMS - stick with the temperature spec, but a number of sources say that it works ok with paper.). I'd probably try the Ctein "room temperature" variation, where essentially you mix your developer WITHOUT STARTER (as I recall), giving an overly active developer that seems to be acceptable (per Ctein) at some nominal room temperature for a specific time. (I'm strictly trusting Ctein's judgment on this.) Per Ctein, the "control plots" DO NOT match the Kodak aim plots, normally a bad thing, but Ctein judges the print results, after color-correction, to be equivalent. Again, I am strictly trusting Ctein on this.

 

Be aware that RA-4 developer is considered to be a skin sensitizer - use bare hands at your own risk. I'd personally use those disposal blue nitrile rubber gloves to handle the prints.

 

You can print with either a colorhead OR with filters manually inserted, but the manual filters are probably more subject to error, and don't give the finest increments.

 

In my opinion, those colored viewing filters are next to useless. If you wanna try them, there are two ways to view: 1) hold it over your eye for half the effect, or 2) lay it on top of the print. They'll give an approximate effect on areas that are not white. (White confuses the issue because when you are actually printing white things, a color filtration change essentially does NOT change them. But... a viewing filter WILL drastically change the color of white paper. So keep this in mind.

 

As a note, I've worked with dozens and dozens of professional color-correctors; they virtually never use a viewing filter. Basically only to demonstrate to a member of lab management who may occasionally question their judgment.

 

In my opinion, your best method for learning to recognize colors is to make what is known as a color ring-a-round. To make one, get a good negative that is representative of the sort of thing you shoot most - if you do portrait work, use one with a person (preferably a couple different complexions in one shot). Make what you think is a good print, then a series of color variations in a couple of strengths. (Don't waste paper on full-size prints - a narrow strip should suffice; ideally you'd mount them on a board.) You can use both plus and minus filtration in cyan, magenta, and yellow; the results will be, for example, cyan to red via the cyan filter, magenta to green via the magenta filter, and yellow to blue via the yellow filter. Yes, it's a lot of variations, but once you do this it will mostly end confusion over what color is what.

 

It's probably worth sketching a "color chart" for reference. Draw three circles that overlap - label them red, green, and blue. Where red and green overlap is yellow (the complement of blue). Where red and blue overlap is magenta (the complement of green). And finally, where blue and green overlap is cyan (the complement of red).

 

When you color-correct prints (from negs), there's an easy-to-remember, nearly infallible rule - "always do the wrong thing." For example, if a print is too red, the "wrong thing" seems to be to add more red (to the filter pack); so that is what you want to do. However... we don't normally use red filtration. So you look at your color chart sketch and see that the combination of yellow and magenta seems to be red. So to add "red" to the filter pack, add equal amounts of yellow and magenta. (Note that almost every color correction we do is traditionally done with only two filters - magenta and yellow, and you should be able to get to these on your color chart.)

 

This ought to get you started, right?

 

Ps, absolutely do not try to judge color prints under compact fluorescent lamps (nor any eco-friendly fluorescents). I'm not gonna recommend a viewing light except to say, for a reality check view by natural light coming in through a window. A lot of people tend to worry about this as the outdoors light coming in will tend to be bluish (you may tend to make your prints "yellowish" to counteract this). But that effect is fairly minimal compared to the spectral problems of eco-fluorescent lamps.

Edited November 4, 2019 by Bill C

[glen_h]

I have done a lot of Panalure, and just a little RA-4, and have a #13 safelight.

 

The word "light" should not be connected with the #13.

 

I once dropped a sheet of paper (small) on the floor, and couldn't find it.

(It was in the shadow of the safelight, but would have been easy with

the usual OC or other black and white safelights.

 

I have an actual #10, which is supposed to be darker (but is bigger)

that I haven't tried yet.

[ben_hutcherson]

Thanks everyone for the responses.

 

I will check the references mentioned.

 

This is still something I want to try, but I may need to put it off a little while. I had sort of been planning to move in the next year anyway for a variety of reasons, but that process got accelerated a bit yesterday when I found out that the current owner of my townhome want to sell. My next place is going to have a better-suited(if not purpose built) darkroom, but I don't want to add TOO much to what I already have.

 

I have tentatively made a deal with someone on the forum for a Jobo which will need 8x10 or whatever other sized print drums, but otherwise will suit me well for several other things I want to do. It will be the first of the year before I can get it.

 

It killed me-my camera store had a Nikor-branded 6x7 enlarger with a color head when I was in yesterday that they probably would have sold me inexpensively, but it seemed like a cheaply built enlarger. I'd rather have a color head for one of my Beselers.

[robcalhoun]

You can print RA-4 with trays and that is the easiest and cheapest way. I use Kodak RA Developer/Replenisher RT at room temperature (68-75F) for two minutes for developer, followed by Kodak Bleach-Fix for two minutes and a four minute wash. A stop bath can be used but I have found it is not necessary with tray processing (highly recommended for drums). Thus the processing is actually easier than b&w. I used drums years ago and when room temperature processing with trays became feasible, I quit the drums and have never regretted it. The developer can have high capacity if you store it properly between printing sessions.

 

You must learn to color balance the prints as indicated earlier, but it just takes some experience and a little knowledge of color theory . All in all, I don't think color printing is any harder to master than b&w printing, maybe easier.

[rodeo_joe1]

I did a lot of hand colour printing over the years, and found it got more and more difficult to tray process, as materials were increasingly designed for faster and higher temperature processing.

 

IMO tray processing stopped being consistent or practical with RA-2. I got a Durst automatic processing machine (RP-20?) and the issue was instantly solved. Then along came RA-4, with which the machine wasn't compatible, and I was back to square one. I did buy a used Durst Printo kit, but by then digital and scanning had become the normal workflow and the Printo fell into disuse. My experience with RT chemicals was that results were noticeably inferior to the recommended high-temperature process that the paper was designed to use.

[rodeo_joe1]

It killed me-my camera store had a Nikor-branded 6x7 enlarger with a color head when I was in yesterday that they probably would have sold me inexpensively, but it seemed like a cheaply built enlarger. I'd rather have a color head for one of my Beselers.

The Nikor 6x7 was apparently made by LPL. It doesn't look as robust as my LPL C7700, but it doesn't look rubbish either.

 

Working on the 'bird in hand' principle, I'd go for it if it has all the carriers you need. And especially if it has a decent 90 ~ 105mm lens with it. Because who knows when a Beseler colour head will come along in the right condition and at the right price?

[ben_hutcherson]

The Nikor 6x7 was apparently made by LPL. It doesn't look as robust as my LPL C7700, but it doesn't look rubbish either.

 

Working on the 'bird in hand' principle, I'd go for it if it has all the carriers you need. And especially if it has a decent 90 ~ 105mm lens with it. Because who knows when a Beseler colour head will come along in the right condition and at the right price?

 

Fair enough-I'll call tomorrow(the shop isn't open on Mondays) and ask about it.

 

Lenses I'm not super worried about-they'd probably throw an El-Nikkor in if I asked for it, or might price it super cheap if I took it lens-less. I have a couple of Schneiders in that FL range, so I'm probably okay.

[rodeo_joe1]

they'd probably throw an El-Nikkor in if I asked for it,....

Crikey Ben, your local photo store sounds more like a photographer's charity than a business!

 

There used to be a shop like that in my vicinity. A few old geezers would gather there on a Saturday and shoot the breeze about photography and life in general. I never saw much money change hands, and one of the regular 'customers' would openly call it the local photo club meeting.

 

I got some real bargains there, but that store is now long gone.:(

[glen_h]

There used to be a store near me that would rent or sell old (used) photographic equipment.

 

At the time, I thought they were overpriced.

 

Now also long gone, replaced by a Thai restaurant.

 

Seems that either overpriced or underpriced and you won't last.

[ben_hutcherson]

Trust me, Joe, they get plenty of money from me. I often get good deals on stuff purely because of the physical labor involved in actually uncovering a random doo-dads with the response of "I forgot I even had that."

 

In addition, many times things like darkroom stuff come in from estate lots that the shop probably bought at pennies on the dollar due to the sheer volume of it and them paying a flat price just to "get it out of the way." Even if their price to me is "cheap" they're often still doubling their money or better on it. Cash from me is also easier and faster than Ebaying it and all the headaches that come with that.

 

In any case, I just called and asked about the Nikor enlarger. It comes with 35mm, 6x6, and 6x7 carriers. Apparently it takes something smaller than an M39 thread, but he said he'd find something that fits it and would include. $95 is the price on that-I'm mulling that one over.

[glen_h]

There are a lot of enlargers around without negative carriers.

 

Finding one with three is pretty rare!

[BeBu Lamar]

I did quite a bit of RA-4 printing but never did it in the tray. I don't know if I can process it in the tray in total darkness. Besides I always use my chemical in one shot I do not reuse them for the sake on consistency. I always use a unicolor drum with the rotator base. They are cheap and I think I still have one for 8x10.

[glen_h]

I did quite a bit of RA-4 printing but never did it in the tray. I don't know if I can process it in the tray in total darkness. Besides I always use my chemical in one shot I do not reuse them for the sake on consistency. I always use a unicolor drum with the rotator base. They are cheap and I think I still have one for 8x10.

 

I have an actual safelight with a #13 filter, and another filter that isn't in a safelight.

 

They aren't bright, but probably good enough to get the paper into, and out of, the tray.

(I mostly used it with Panalure, but also a few times with RA4 in a tray.)

 

If you are doing an 8x10, the Unidrum works well. It also works for two 5x7, or

four 4x5. If you want to do one 4x5 as a test, it doesn't work as well.

 

Many years ago, I used Ektachrome 1993 paper in a Unidrum, and that doesn't allow for any safelight.

 

If I remember, the 8x10 Unidrum uses 2oz of chemistry one shot.

 

I suspect that one can't do an 8x10 in 2oz in a tray, so one would use more chemistry,

and for multiple sheets.

[glen_h]

A year or so ago, I got a 16x20 Unidrum for a low price.

 

I now have some Crystal Archive 36x24 paper, which I got for a very low price.

[robcalhoun]

RA-4 is easy to do in trays since it can be done at room temperature with times comparable to b&w. With drums you have to pour the solutions in and out, include a pre-wet and stop bath, have a way to rotate the drum, and rinse and dry the drum before the next print. A beginner learning to color balance prints wants ease, and quick feedback that tray processing gives. Working in total darkness is not hard, just takes a little getting used to.

 

The Kodak RA/RT developer is used by many who do or have done room temperature tray processing and gives excellent, consistent results.

[BeBu Lamar]

However, I read a most documents from Kodak and didn't see they recommend a safelight. Also, I mostly did it at the 100 degrees F as recommended by Kodak for the RA-4 chemicals.

[robcalhoun]

The "Handbook of Kodak Photographic Filters" indicates #10 and #13 can be used for color printing papers. I have never used a safelight for color but I understand these are quite dim. Working in darkness can easily be learned and managed.

 

Kodak does not advertise the use of the Kodak RA/RT Developer/Replenisher for room temperature use, perhaps because it is designed for lab machines, or perhaps they don't know or care. In any case it gives excellent results when used for two minutes, as many users know. Likewise with Kodak Bleach-Fix.

[glen_h]

The #10 is older, and was used for papers in the 1960's and maybe early 1970's.

 

I had some panalure about 1980, but no #13, so did it in the dark.

 

Even the #13 is pretty dark. With Panalure, I once dropped some on the floor, and couldn't see

it, in the indirect light from the #13.

 

I also have a #10 but haven't tried it yet. I think that one is 8x10, maybe bigger.

[glen_h]

Here is the Fuji data sheet:

 

https://www.fujifilmusa.com/shared/bin/Fujicolor_Crystal_Archive_Supreme.pdf

 

It says two Fuji #103a or Wratten #13. I think that means two of the #13,

and for only 1 minute.

 

As dark as #13 is, I believe that you won't see anything with two.

[glen_h]

http://wwwru.kodak.com/global/en/professional/support/techPubs/ti0845/ti0845m.gif

 

is the transmission spectrum for the #13. (Other filters are there, too.)

 

Transmission is about 0.3%, 20nm wide around 600nm.

 

Out of the 700nm to 400nm visible spectrum, it is about 20nm wide, so about 6%.

(That isn't quite the right way, but close enough for now.)

 

So maybe 0.02% of the light.

 

Two filters will have the same transmission window, but the 0.3% will still apply.

Two will be very dark.

[glen_h]

OK, this one:

 

https://www.fujifilmusa.com/shared/bin/FUJIFLEX_AF3-0172U4.pdf

 

only needs one 103A or Wratten 13 filter.

 

This one seems to be designed for microsecond scanned laser exposure.