Re: Modern RC Papers
I just finished writing an article about a drag racing driver who was rather well known from the early sixties to the early seventies. In conjunction with this, I had to sort through his stacks of old photographs lookng for some to illustrate the article. The prints from the early to mid sixties were all on fiber based paper. They had been taken by magazine photographers and track photographer, guys you'd call semi pros. I'm sure some of them were printed by good custom labs. At least half of them were yellowed, probably due to insufficient washing. Many were cracked or split. Most of the prints from the late sixties and early seventies were on RC papers. Out of perhaps a hundred, a few were discolored. A couple that appeared to have been overwashed were separating. Most were in very good condition. In fact, overall, a higher percentage of the RC prints had survived than had the fiber based. Of course they were five or six years younger on average. But there was a substantial difference. Paul William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: Paul Stenquist Subject: Modern RC Papers By the way, my favorite RC paper is Ilford Multigrade IV in both Pearl and Glossy. It's very nice, and with the 1/2 step Ilford filters from 00 to 4, the level of control is exceptional. Who remembers Abba? Bronzing Queen Be disgusted by her Yellow sheen. Yaaa Y WW - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Modern RC Papers
On Wednesday, January 16, 2002, at 09:40 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote: Horsefeathers. The emulsion layer of RC and fiber based papers is the same: silver halide crystals in gelatin emulsion. Most of the time when I'm printing fibre, it's Ilford's graded Galerie stuff. I've found that I can produce a print with the same apparent contrast as one I've made on RC, but with significantly more detail in the richest, deepest blacks and some more detail in the brightest highlights. My prints on Agfa's Multicontrast Classic fibre have displayed similar, but not as extreme, results. Trying to pull this black detail out in an RC print invariably results in a wimpy black. What's more, in terms of what was described, it seems that most practitioners of FB printing can't hope to make more than one or two final prints in a session, given the time that has to be devoted to washing and drying. Once one knows how a paper reacts when it dries, one can continue testing and printing without waiting for every test to dry. One also does not have to stop printing while waiting for prints to wash. Personally, when I am doing more than a couple of fibre prints at a time, I set up three wash stations: one in the big darkroom sink, one in the small darkroom sink, and one in the big bathroom sink. This way, subsequent prints do not mess up the wash time of the ones already in there. I have found that the only thing slowing me down with fibre, vs. RC, is the longer developer time. Of course, the prints take longer to dry, but so what? I leave them overnight. A quick note on the RC vs. FB longevity debate: much of my objection to RC prints comes from machine-processed RC prints. Most labs do not process their RC in trays. A properly tray processed and washed RC print can last a good long time. However, when you reduce the full develop-fix-wash time down to 90 seconds, you are making some serious compromises, significantly in the wash. The only prints I have seen of my own that have bronzed or discoloured are from when I was at Sheridan, using their paper processor (a badly maintained Ilfospeed machine). The prints that were exposed to a significant amount of sunlight (on the wall in a well-lit bedroom) bronzed in less than five years. -Aaron - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Modern RC Papers
Most of the time when I'm printing fibre, it's Ilford's graded Galerie stuff. I've found that I can produce a print with the same apparent contrast as one I've made on RC, but with significantly more detail in the richest, deepest blacks and some more detail in the brightest highlights. My prints on Agfa's Multicontrast Classic fibre have displayed similar, but not as extreme, results. There's a similar (subtle but visible) difference between printing with VC and graded fiber papers. You can just pull a bit more shadow detail out of graded papers, generally. --Mike - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Modern RC Papers
Humph! I think you guys are comparing apples and oranges. I doubt there would be much difference given the same emulsion on both bases. Ciao, graywolf [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: Mike Johnston [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2002 1:49 PM Subject: Re: Modern RC Papers Most of the time when I'm printing fibre, it's Ilford's graded Galerie stuff. I've found that I can produce a print with the same apparent contrast as one I've made on RC, but with significantly more detail in the richest, deepest blacks and some more detail in the brightest highlights. My prints on Agfa's Multicontrast Classic fibre have displayed similar, but not as extreme, results. There's a similar (subtle but visible) difference between printing with VC and graded fiber papers. You can just pull a bit more shadow detail out of graded papers, generally. --Mike - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Modern RC Papers
- Original Message - From: Paul Stenquist Subject: Re: Modern RC Papers I just finished writing an article about a drag racing driver who was rather well known from the early sixties to the early seventies. In conjunction with this, I had to sort through his stacks of old photographs lookng for some to illustrate the article. The prints from the early to mid sixties were all on fiber based paper. They had been taken by magazine photographers and track photographer, guys you'd call semi pros. I'm sure some of them were printed by good custom labs. At least half of them were yellowed, probably due to insufficient washing. Many were cracked or split. Most of the prints from the late sixties and early seventies were on RC papers. Out of perhaps a hundred, a few were discolored. A couple that appeared to have been overwashed were separating. Most were in very good condition. In fact, overall, a higher percentage of the RC prints had survived than had the fiber based. Of course they were five or six years younger on average. But there was a substantial difference. Regarding the yellowing due to insufficent washing, that can hardly be blamed on the material. Anyway, the bronzing issue is (was anyway) very real, and Ilford RC was (is) the worst offender. This, according to no less than Ctein, who I tend to put a lot of faith in. The article I read on the subject was written afew years ago in DCCT, I believe. Mike Johnson might have a better idea, he would have been the editor at the time. Unfortunately I have been unable to locate that particular issue in my pile of dreck that I call a filing system. He did say that the problem was with framed behind glass prints. I have seen it with framed, unframed and laminated prints that have come out of my darkroom. It is not a problem with bad handling or insufficient fixing or washing. It is a problem inherent to the RC substrate itself. Ctein said the only paper he had found that didn't do it was PolyMax RC. I think the problem cropped up with the introduction of the series 4 Ilford paper, and its competitors, so the older papers are likely not affected anyway. OTOH, they have substrate yellowing and delamination issues William Robb - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Modern RC Papers
On Thursday, January 17, 2002, at 05:33 PM, Tom Rittenhouse wrote: Humph! I think you guys are comparing apples and oranges. I doubt there would be much difference given the same emulsion on both bases. Well, even the VC fibre I've printed has offered more detail in both the darkest black and brightest white than I can squeeze out of RC. I don't know if this is a function of the base or because the emulsion is perhaps different in some way. -Aaron - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Modern RC Papers
- Original Message - From: Tom Rittenhouse Subject: Re: Modern RC Papers Humph! I think you guys are comparing apples and oranges. I doubt there would be much difference given the same emulsion on both bases. I think Ilford is the only manufacturer that uses the same emulsion formulation on ~some~ of their RC papers as they do on their FB papers. William Robb No, I am not picking on you Tom, honest. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Modern RC Papers
I would get involveed in this agaom bit ,my fomgers are cracled amd bleedomg from too many hours in the darktoom, and I can;t typ. Paul Mike Johnston wrote: Humph! I think you guys are comparing apples and oranges. I doubt there would be much difference given the same emulsion on both bases. Ah, but we KNOW there is. g --Mike - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Modern RC Papers
Huh?! Contrasty compared to what? Seems to me that cold light is less contrasty than a condenser system, although that issue has been argued by Ctein and others to not be true. I believe he said that there is no real difference in contrast between the two systems. Of course, I'll have a chance to test that soon enough g. Paul Stenquist wrote: I generally work only in the 1/2 to 2 range, since I use a cold light, which is inherently contrasty. -- Shel Belinkoff mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.earthlink.net/~belinkoff/ - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Modern RC Papers
Shel Belinkoff wrote:One thing that I have noticed, and it may only be because I'm still a bit behind the curve, is that it seems easier (from my memory) to manipulate fiber-based paper during the printing stage. That's cerrtainly true in terms of development. RC papers develop so fast that you have to let them develop fully. It''s almost impossible to yank them from the tray at less than full development and still end up with a nice print. Fiber on the other hand can be pulled out before the development is 100% complete, and the effect is virtually the same as a shorter exposure would have been. I'm still looking for a new enlarger that will print the full neg of my 6x7s. I passed on a Beseler 23C with Dichroic head yesterday on ebay. I think the buy it now was $200. I'm kicking myself a bit. But I still entertain the notion of an enlarger that will also do 4x5. Either the Beseler 45 or the Omega 2. And I'm really in love with the zone VI cold head on my Omega B22XL. When I get the big enlarger, I think I'm going to want to go cold head again. Paul Shel Belinkoff mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.earthlink.net/~belinkoff/ - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Modern RC Papers
The cold head on my Omega B22 provides more contrast on Multigrade IV than did the condenser head that preceded it. But that's due to the color of the light, which is more blue than the condenser's tungsten light. Now, once the filtration is adjusted to compensate for the different temperature of the light, the cold head print may actually appear somewhat less contrasty because the tonal range is (allegedly) somewhat extended. In any case, I prefer the look I can achieve with the Zone VI cold head in comparison to that of the B22 condenser head. The grain is not as sharply defined, but there's a silky smoothness to the prints that I find appealing. Are you using a cold head on any of your enlargers? Paul Shel Belinkoff wrote: Huh?! Contrasty compared to what? Seems to me that cold light is less contrasty than a condenser system, although that issue has been argued by Ctein and others to not be true. I believe he said that there is no real difference in contrast between the two systems. Of course, I'll have a chance to test that soon enough g. Paul Stenquist wrote: I generally work only in the 1/2 to 2 range, since I use a cold light, which is inherently contrasty. -- Shel Belinkoff mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.earthlink.net/~belinkoff/ - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Modern RC Papers
Yeah - the dichro head is a cold light head. The nice thing about the dichro is that the filtration is built in and stepless. If I need more contrast than grade 2, and less than grade 2½, I can get it. And with the Iford MG IV it's easy to see very slight contrast changes. This also makes burning and dodging very simple, as different areas of the print can easily be printed to different contrasts. It's a really nice setup, and I'm very glad I got it. You might want to think about such a setup when you get your new enlarger. Paul Stenquist wrote: The cold head on my Omega B22 provides more contrast on Multigrade IV than did the condenser head that preceded it. But that's due to the color of the light, which is more blue than the condenser's tungsten light. Now, once the filtration is adjusted to compensate for the different temperature of the light, the cold head print may actually appear somewhat less contrasty because the tonal range is (allegedly) somewhat extended. In any case, I prefer the look I can achieve with the Zone VI cold head in comparison to that of the B22 condenser head. The grain is not as sharply defined, but there's a silky smoothness to the prints that I find appealing. Are you using a cold head on any of your enlargers? -- Shel Belinkoff mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.earthlink.net/~belinkoff/ - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Modern RC Papers
- Original Message - From: Paul Stenquist Subject: Modern RC Papers By the way, my favorite RC paper is Ilford Multigrade IV in both Pearl and Glossy. It's very nice, and with the 1/2 step Ilford filters from 00 to 4, the level of control is exceptional. Who remembers Abba? Bronzing Queen Be disgusted by her Yellow sheen. Yaaa Y WW - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Modern RC Papers
- Original Message - From: Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2002 9:11 PM Subject: Re: Modern RC Papers Huh?! Contrasty compared to what? Seems to me that cold light is less contrasty than a condenser system, although that issue has been argued by Ctein and others to not be true. I believe he said that there is no real difference in contrast between the two systems. Of course, I'll have a chance to test that soon enough g. Depending on the cold light, there can be a trememndous contrast difference with VC papers, which is what most people use. Whether this is a good thing or not is debatable. Personally, I use VC for the quick and dirty stuff, then go to graded FB for the good prints. With VC papers, the contrast is controlled by blue and green light. We add yellow to the filter pack ( minus blue) to lower contrast, and we add magenta to the filter pack ( minus green) to increase contrast. Some cold light heads (some Aristo older heads come to mind) are quite blue, and are therefore quite contrasty as well, when used with variable contrast paper. William Robb - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Modern RC Papers
Paul Stenquist wrote: . all of the many hundreds of RC prints I made 25 years ago are in fine condition. Actually, that is true of most of mine as well, come to think of it. By the way, my favorite RC paper is Ilford Multigrade IV in both Pearl and Glossy. It's very nice, and with the 1/2 step Ilford filters from 00 to 4, the level of control is exceptional. Paul - I second that. I haven't printed anything, sadly, for over a year, but I like this paper very much also. annsan - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
