Adox MCC vs. Fine Print Vario Classic FB

[jglass]

Can anyone sum up the larger differences, if any, between these two papers? I googled but did not find much from people with experience with both.

Thanks.

Jeff

 

[jglass]

Well, I did think there would be some interest or response to this. Can anyone tell me anything about FP Vario Classic. I've tried MCC and I like it but I want a more matt surface.

 

[K-G]

I have used the Vario Classic with glossy surface and I am very pleased with it. Developed in Dektol it comes out with a very neutral grey tone and realy good, deep black areas. I used the old Agfa MCC 111 as my standard paper before it was discontinued and I regard it as the King of all VC papers. I have received the first packages of the new ADOX MCC 110 recently , but I have not tested it enough yet to make a comparison. The Vario Classic is, as far as I know, avialable in a matt surface while the MCC 110 still only comes as glossy paper.
Some technical details about Vario Classic are as follows :
1. Use only red darkroom safelight.
2. It may take somewhat longer time in the developer before you get what it can give in the highlights.
3. It should not be used with to diluted deloper.
4. It consumes more fix than normal VC papers.
5. It has a thicker paper base than the MCC 110.

These five points are mainly from ADOX descriptions but also from personal experience. Even if I have a feeling that MCC 110 will be able to give you even better results, the Vario Classic is truly an outstanding good paper. The important thing is that you take your time to get used to it.
Good luck and enjoy your printing sesions !

Karl-Gustaf

 

[jglass]

Yes, thanks, K-G. I would really like to hear what you think about thenew MCC110 when you've had a chance to use it. I really like it, but am trying to get up my courage to buy a heap of paper and I want to make the right choice for me. I'll be testing the Vario classic soon.

BTW, I've been developing in Ethol LPD which i also really like. Unbelievable shelf and tray life.

 

[gattu marrudu]

I have started testing this paper. Compared to other brands (Ilford, Kentmere) it seems to give me much lower contrast and higher speed when printing pyro negatives. Some prints I pulled on Kentmere with an Ilford grade 3 filter I cannot even achieve with grade 5 on Adox. Before the film b+f reaches the Dmax, the highlights are already getting grey.
I will print some step wedges and post the results.

My setup:
Enlarger: DeVere 507, diffuse color head (dichroic filters disabled - they are broken!), halogen lights
Negative: pyro, with some but not excessive fog
Filters: Ilford filters under the lens, until I get some dichroic glasses...
Developer: PF 130 undiluted, 3 minutes

 

[Philippe Grunchec]

http://www.moersch-photochemie.de/content/galerie/beispielepapier

Excellent source, as usual!

 

[jglass]

gattu, by "this paper," do you mean FP Vario Classic or MCC?

 

[gattu marrudu]

Philippe, thanks for the great link. Although, it is hard to compare prints from different negatives and with so many variables.
Jglass, I mean the FP Vario. I print in very large formats and I do not know about MCC rolls.
BTW, I printed some step tablets last night and the Vario seems to be about 2 stops faster than Kentmere Fineprint and a longer tonal scale (i.e. like a ISO400 negative compared to an ISO100). Developing for 6 minutes gains 1/2 stop compared to a 3 minute development in undiluted Ansco 130. I will post some scans as promised as soon as I have some time.

 

[Philippe Grunchec]

@ gattu: you are absolutely right, too many variables are sometimes involved on Wolfgang's site. He is so talented!

 

[StigHagen]

I tested Adox Vario Classic yesterday, and was surprised how good it was. I feel it is very similar to Adox MCC, so if you like that paper you will like Vario Classic as well. The only difference I could see was that Adox MCC have a bit deeper black, but probably selenium toning will somehow narrow that little gap even more.

Im not sure how the papers tone differently. Do somebody know? When would you choose Adox Vario Classic instead of Adox MCC, now as the price is almost the same?

 

[Willie Jan]

I have started testing this paper. Compared to other brands (Ilford, Kentmere) it seems to give me much lower contrast and higher speed when printing pyro negatives. Some prints I pulled on Kentmere with an Ilford grade 3 filter I cannot even achieve with grade 5 on Adox. Before the film b+f reaches the Dmax, the highlights are already getting grey.
I will print some step wedges and post the results.

My setup:
Enlarger: DeVere 507, diffuse color head (dichroic filters disabled - they are broken!), halogen lights
Negative: pyro, with some but not excessive fog
Filters: Ilford filters under the lens, until I get some dichroic glasses...
Developer: PF 130 undiluted, 3 minutes

Adox states to use the adotol print developer and put it into the tray for at least 3 minutes. If you used a different developer it could influence your result.

I used kentmere in the past and have the opposite conclusion. Kentmere paper did not reach such a high dmax and above grade 3 nothing happened anymore with the contrast.

The only negative thing i found about vario classic is that the base could have been a bit thicker. It is easier to get a dent in the paper when moving from bath to bath.

be aware that the Matt variant is very matt.

I am using the adox line of paper now for 4 years. The MCC is also a very nice one. At this moment only available in gossy, matt is not yet there.

Me and a friend where looking for a thicker paper and also searched at the ilford range. What struck me was the price. Why is the price double the price of another brand??

I use fp4+ film (4x5), develop with pyrocat hd at 12 min 1:1:100 and use a durst 1200 condensor head. Print at grade #2

 

[K-G]

During the winter I have used ADOX MCC 110 , ADOX Vario Classic and ILFORD Multigrade IV FB . The deloper has been ILFORD Multigrade . It has not been a systematic testing but I must say that all three papers are excelent and my personal favourite is ADOX MCC 110 . The realy deep black parts of the prints together with an outstanding capability to separate the gray tones and on top of it the just slightly warm printing tone makes it unresistable. Perhaps toning can do something to the different papers , but I have not tried that.
In the latest volume of Silvershotz magazine ( Volume 7 Edition 3 ), they named the MCC 110 the best silver gelatine paper of the year and also said that it is one of the best papers that they have tested in the last twenty years. The Vario Classic and Multigrade IV also give excelent results handled the right way, but both are a litle more on the neutral/cold side. If you want to buy Ilford papers , it may be a good idea to look at the Silverprint web-site. MCC 110 and Vario Classic are best bought at Fotoimpex . Both companies have very customer good service. Keep using the good alternatives that are still beeing manufactured !

Karl-Gustaf



http://www.fotoimpex.de/

http://www.silverprint.co.uk/

 

[K-G]

developer and good customer service . Please excuse a butterfinger.

Karl-Gustaf

 

[Tom Stanworth]

I dont think MCC and Vario classic are anything like each other.

MCC in glossy is much glossier. The vario is a dull gloss comparitively.
MCC faster
MCC thinner
MCC has whiter base. Vario appears to be a more natural, soft white. MCC is quite bright.
Vario has great shadow separation but can be a bit odd in the higher values. Still, if a neg matches the paper its very nice.

IMO the MCC is a far superior all round paper with characteristics that justify the higher price. Next to MGWT, its a great not so warm alternative with a whiter base. In fact, MCC is IMO about the best standard paper out there, but it cannot quite match MGWT for high end contrast.