Adox MCC MG FB vs Ilford MGIV FB glossy

[ymc226]

Has anyone who have used the 2 care to comment on the differences. I have only used Ilford FB MG both in matte and glossy and have so far liked the results.

There have been great excitement regarding introduction of Adox MCC and I want to know what it is all about.

 

[Ian Grant]

MCC is a warm tone paper and will behave quite differently to MGIV Fibre based. I've not tried the new Adox version but the Agfa version was one of my main papers.

A warm tone paper gives much greater flexibility in many ways to advanced printers particularly with regards to image colour just through variations in developers/development.

Ian

 

[Michael W]

I always found the Agfa had more dramatic dry down than the Ilford. Once you take that into account they ae both very nice papers. Reportedly the new Adox paper is on a whiter base than the MCC.

 

[Rolleiflexible]

I use a lot of the Adox/Agfa paper. In addition
to Ian's observiations, I find that MCC 111
handles tonal transitions in caucasian skin
more smoothly than does MGIV. MCC has a
slightly warm emulsion but whites remain
bright (thanks to the base) and blacks are
pure, so you see the warmth of the emulsion
mostly in the midtones. And MCC dries flat.

 

[Ian Grant]

The new MCC should be capable of good warm blacks, but it's worth adding that European printers tend to bend and stretch the warmth of papers like MCC far more than their US counterparts

Ian

 

[ymc226]

Thanks, once I use up all of my Ilford, I will try MCC. First, I have some Fotokemika FB Matte to use as well which I have standardized on my RH Design Analyser Pro which works wonderfully to get a good first print.

It's alot of work to commit to another paper as I need about 4-6 hours to standardize it on the Analyser Pro but once its done, the work flow is so much more efficient.

 

[Tom Stanworth]

MCC had a mild warm tone that was brought out in warm devs but subtle otherwise. The base was similar to forte PWT in that it was not pure white like MG4 but not cream or even an obvious off white unless you saw it side by side with another.

I found MCC just worked better for most of my prints than either MG4 or WT, however, the new warmtone base is lovely and the paper is working very well for me now. FAR nicer than the old jauncided base it was on.

MCC has a different curve to MG4 so having both about is a good idea. If a neg is being difficult on one, try the other and sometimes it just meshes better. The new paper... I dont know.

 

[Ian Grant]

I found MCC just worked better for most of my prints than either MG4 or WT, however, the new warmtone base is lovely and the paper is working very well for me now. FAR nicer than the old jauncided base it was on.

I have to agree about the Ilford Warmtome, when I looked for an alternative to MCC when Agfa stopped manufacture I chose Polywarmtone instead mainly because of the dirty stained look of base colour of the Ilford paper.

I have some of the new base (from last years factory tour) and it's so different, and I'll give it a more extensive trial.

Ian

 

[ooze]

The new Adox MCC base is different than the Agfa version. It's pure white compared to the slightly creamy base of Agfa.

I was one of those APUGgers who got a batch of Adox MCC from the pre-production run, and I printed the same negs on Adox MCC, Agfa MCC and Ilford MGIV. What I saw from those few prints was that apart from the white base the Adox paper showed exactly the same response as Agfa's. Even exposure times were the same.

Both Adox and Agfa MCC are IMO superior in tonal rendition to Ilford MGIV...pure personal taste.

 

[ymc226]

Ooze,

You're making it hard to resist . . .

 

[tom_bw]

I struggle to get nice prints from MGIV - rather muddy highlights. I much preferred MGIII. I have used Agfa MCC / MCP and have found these to be my preferred multigrade papers.

But, this could all depend on the film/dev combinations, and my personal preference...

 

[georgecp]

I used Agfa MCC and Calument Zone VI Brillian VC for years after working with Ilford MGIV. Like many others, I found the characteristic curve of MGIV was usually not a good fit for my negatives. It has a more linear response to tone than the othe papers mentioned. This is the cause of muddy highlights mentioned by tom_bw. I believe that it can be a useful option, depending on your film choices and negatives. I just received my first shipment of Adox MCC and will work with it for a few weeks or so. I will report back to the group when I have some results.