A Question about Ilford MGIV RC Deluxe

Last Saturday, I finally setup my darkroom for a days work. I wanted to test some papers since it has been a long time between darkroom sessions (30 years). I had Ilford MGIV RC Deluxe Satin and Pearl, Fomatone MG warmtone, Forte Polywarmtone RC Plus and Freestyle Private Reserve (Agfa). All papers were RC. Bromophen was the developer.

I started with the Satin and figured out the time and f-stop for a good print using Ilford VC filters (a #3 filter 20 sec. @ f-11). Using the same negative I was surprised that the Pearl needed about 8 seconds more time to get the same exposure.
What's with that? Is that a normal thing?

The Private Reserve was much richer in blacks (I always did love Brovira), but naturally Agfa is out of business.
The Foma exposed about the same as the Satin and Agfa which was interesting in that it is a warmtone paper. It looked good.
The Forte was down right amazing! What a slow paper compared to the rest! I had to correct the exposure by two stops to get somewhat close to the rest. But still it has very nice tones.

Next time I will take the same papers and negative to check out a warm tone developer. Probably Ilford Warmtone and then later LPD, Agfa Neutol WA, or ?

What's your recommendations for an alternative warmtone developer.

Thanks for the help

Dan

Dan, I've found the same thing with Ilford, from batch to batch there are some variations in speed. One would think that it would be a standard time with similar papers, but as you have found, this just isn't the case. There could be a difference in age which would cause this, but I'm not sure if it matters really. I've had good luck with Dektol at 2:1 and 2 minutes at about 70f for MGIV. This will give some nice blacks, but a selenium toner is mandatory with this combination to remove the cast.

For a warm tone developer, I like Neutol WA. For most other uses, I stay with Dektol. tim

If you can find any, Agfa Neutol WA and Forte is a great combination.

Dear All,

Interesting comments, as to paper speed, one of our batch to batch tests relates to speed / development it cannot exceed + or - 2.00% from the specification which means you should detect virtually no difference in speed between papers in the same MULTIGRADE families from batch to batch, age can obviously affect sensitivity but not to the extent mentioned. Far better send it back to us ( marked for my attention ) and I will have it checked out.

Simon ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology Limited

My experience has certainly been that batch-to-batch consistency (if the batches are within a couple of years of age of each other) has been excellent with Ilford products. I had to change paper batches during a large print run the other day and the density on each batch is indistinguishable. I was quite impressed.

Dan, yes, this discrepancy in speed you noticed from one Ilford MGIV RC surface to the other is contrary to my experience. Sometimes a portrait client will order mixed surfaces requiring me to switch from matte to gloss, and the exposure is always the same.

Regarding Noseoil's Dektol dilution, you wrote 2:1...is that two parts water or two parts stock? I usually use 1:2 (stock:water), and I would think that 2:1 (stock:water) would yield much higher contrast, colder results. Interested in your experience.

Neal

Oops, dislexic as usual! It is 1:2 dektol to water. Thanks for pointing this out. I do use 2 minutes for full development and good blacks. tim

Thanks for the information.
I bought all of the paper from Freestyle in the same order. It was all 5x7 so I don't think there was an age problem. The developer was fresh mixed and worked well with the other papers.
Anyway I will contact Simon and will go from there.

Thanks again
Dan

To resolve this thread so future readers can sleep at night.

Simon Galley had requested that I send what paper I had left in the two packs to him so Ilford could look at it.
The replacement paper arrived as my shipment to him was still in transit.
I did not have an opportunity to repeat the exposure/development process to test the new paper until last weekend.
Last weekend I was fortunate enough to spend about 8 hrs total in the darkroom.
I did repeat the exposure/development process that showed the discrepancy with the previous papers.
Twice.
The first print test was with fresh chemicals all down the line, the first prints of the day.
The second print series was later in the session after 30 prints were made.
In both cases the papers printed identically. In fact there was no difference between the two series.

My conclusion is that something happened to the original papers.
Heat maybe, could have been an age difference, I don't know but the cause of the problem happened to the paper before I received it as both packs were stored together while in my possession.

In closing, I would like to say that I have never received such wonderful customer support from any company as I have from Ilford. It was not my intent to start a Constitutional crisis with my queries, I was just curious. Ilford went out of their way to prove to me that they feel that every one of their customers are VERY important to them and if they can, within the realm of reason, rectify a problem , they do so. Sorry about all the gushing, I guess I am now an official Ilford fanboy.

The respondents of my original question have my thanks also. I hope that in the future I can provide the same quality insight for someone else that you have provided for me.

Dan

So what can make paper go off quickly?

Good to see your Ilford experience has been positive.

I'm trawling through old threads to see if I can find information on what can make paper go "off" in a short space of time.

I buy only Ilford paper here in Sydney, and have a small mixture of MGIVRC & FB. The latest 25 sheet pack of MGIVRC printed fine in the first two or three sessions but the last two sessions this week have been disastrous. The prints lacked contrast and had strange dark wispy blotches. I took a lot of time and effort to isolate the cause, not thinking that a packet of new paper that had been purchased and opened within the last six weeks could be the cause, yet it was.

So now I am wondering; What could cause this change in paper properties in such a short space of time? How do I tell the manufacture date of the paper?

Well, is it normal for Ilford Multigrade IV RC (8x10) to print average-density-looking negatives in 3 or 4 seconds at f/8? (Beseler 23C II, condenser head w/ above-lens filter drawer, Componon S 50mm [one of the "newer" ones, black, tops out at f/16], no filters, 75W bare bulb, developed in Sprint Quicksilver [1:9 dilution]).

I would be much happier with 15 seconds at f/5.6 or 20-25 seconds at f/8.

Dear Glenn,

Send me the batch number of the paper...I must be honest it does not sound like the paper, and it cannot go ' off' in six weeks, not unless you stuck it in the oven, but I will check it out for sure. Did you put any other paper through the dev ?.

Simon.