Ansco 130 user experience, questions, comments, appreciation...

[DREW WILEY]

That's simply not the case, Don. I have hundreds of prints which tell otherwise. Dektol prints look like Dektol in tone; 130 prints look like 130 and glycin. The dilution (within reason) has nothing to do with it. As far as bromide goes, the amount could be tweaked if necessary; I've just never found it necessary.

I wonder if some people are using over-oxidized glycin instead of fresh.

 

[Don_ih]

That's simply not the case, Don. I have hundreds of prints which tell otherwise.

That's well, Drew. But the chemicals are the chemicals. There's no magic beyond that.

 

[DREW WILEY]

It amazes me how much people get hung up on this versus that formula without paying equal attention to how printing papers significantly differ from one another. Even the same VC paper in the same developer can take on slightly different tones depending on the ratio of VC exposing light. Or it can change personality depending on the length of development, combined with post-toning response.

Dektol generally trends an annoying greenish. Cold tone MQ developers have various responses. With Polygrade V, it could be almost a blue-black; with Ilford MG Cooltone, you never get rid of the greenish bias. The only true neutral black I've gotten with Cooltone is with 130 plus toning in gold chloride. With MGWT, the effect is quite different, naturally. And those classic old graded papers? - well, they're all gone anyway.

Quantification has it place; but so does one's own pair of eyes, which is the final arbiter. Final image tone is quite important to me, and I want to be able to finely tailor it to each respective image. I switched to 130 as my primary developer quite awhile back for a reason.

My jar of amidol powder now has a very lonely life; and any remaining packs of Dektol haven't left their storage shelf for decades, not since Seagull G paper disappeared, which had just enough purplish hue to it to offset the green. The subtle gradation of 130 also differs from Dektol. And all along, I've been diluting it 1:3. But admittedly, I'm not someone who saves used dishwater for the next day, or used developer either.

Chemicals aren't just chemicals. There are different grades of purity to them, and different shelf lives. For example, I was told photographic amidol had to be of a higher purity than even medical amidol, by a phD who mainly sold it to pharmaceutical labs. Glycin changes its personality as it ages, until it turns into nothing more than a chocolate stain, really. That's why unopened glycin powder needs to be kept frozen.

 

[Craig]

I can't say that I have noticed much (any?) of a difference between 130 and Ilford Multigrade developer in the final print. Not enough to go out of my way to import 130 anyway.

In a blind viewing, I certainly couldn't pick out one print developed in Multigrade and one developed in 130.

 

[Milpool]

I suspect in reality @Craig is right and all the hooha about 130 is just that. I think it's another one of those things... the fact Kodak, Ilford etc. had long since abandoned the use of glycin, it automatically acquired that requisite magic compound status.

Anyhow that aside, if you want colder and/or less greenish (bogus) print color just add tiny amounts of PMT to any standard MQ or PQ developer and you're done. It will be a lot cheaper than gold toning, and people won't have to misremember magic papers like Polygrade V, Picker Brilliant etc. anymore either which is a bonus.

It amazes me how much people get hung up on this versus that formula without paying equal attention to how printing papers significantly differ from one another. Even the same VC paper in the same developer can take on slightly different tones depending on the ratio of VC exposing light. Or it can change personality depending on the length of development, combined with post-toning response.

Dektol generally trends an annoying greenish. Cold tone MQ developers have various responses. With Polygrade V, it could be almost a blue-black; with Ilford MG Cooltone, you never get rid of the greenish bias. The only true neutral black I've gotten with Cooltone is with 130 plus toning in gold chloride. With MGWT, the effect is quite different, naturally. And those classic old graded papers? - well, they're all gone anyway.

Quantification has it place; but so does one's own pair of eyes, which is the final arbiter. Final image tone is quite important to me, and I want to be able to finely tailor it to each respective image. I switched to 130 as my primary developer quite awhile back for a reason.

My jar of amidol powder now has a very lonely life; and any remaining packs of Dektol haven't left their storage shelf for decades, not since Seagull G paper disappeared, which had just enough purplish hue to it to offset the green. The subtle gradation of 130 also differs from Dektol. And all along, I've been diluting it 1:3. But admittedly, I'm not someone who saves used dishwater for the next day, or used developer either.

Chemicals aren't just chemicals. There are different grades of purity to them, and different shelf lives. For example, I was told photographic amidol had to be of a higher purity than even medical amidol, by a phD who mainly sold it to pharmaceutical labs. Glycin changes its personality as it ages, until it turns into nothing more than a chocolate stain, really. That's why unopened glycin powder needs to be kept frozen.

 

[chuckroast]

I suspect in reality @Craig is right and all the hooha about 130 is just that. I think it's another one of those things... the fact Kodak, Ilford etc. had long since abandoned the use of glycin, it automatically acquired that requisite magic compound status.

Anyhow that aside, if you want colder and/or less greenish (bogus) print color just add tiny amounts of PMT to any standard MQ or PQ developer and you're done. It will be a lot cheaper than gold toning, and people won't have to misremember magic papers like Polygrade V, Picker Brilliant etc. anymore either which is a bonus.

PMT? What is a "tiny amount"?

 

[GregY]

I suspect in reality @Craig is right and all the hooha about 130 is just that. I think it's another one of those things... the fact Kodak, Ilford etc. had long since abandoned the use of glycin, it automatically acquired that requisite magic compound status.

Anyhow that aside, if you want colder and/or less greenish (bogus) print color just add tiny amounts of PMT to any standard MQ or PQ developer and you're done. It will be a lot cheaper than gold toning, and people won't have to misremember magic papers like Polygrade V, Picker Brilliant etc. anymore either which is a bonus.

Mill, we don't have to misremember, some of us can just go to boxes and pull out prints made on those papers ........

 

[Milpool]

PMT? What is a "tiny amount"?

I'll have to look up my notes from back when I was experimenting with this. It depends on the paper (warmer papers tend to exhibit the most pronounced shifts) and of course how much effect you want (subtle neutralization vs visible blueish-black). PMT (Phenyl mercapto tetrazole) is a powerful restrainer, a relative of benzotriazole. For what it's worth, with the modern/contemporary papers I've used and various standard PQ / MQ developer formulas, I've never found the old benzotriazole trick to do much of anything when it comes to cooling print color, whereas I found PMT does - substantially.

One easy off-the-shelf PMT developer additive you can buy is Moersch Finisher Blue. Alternatively you can buy it from Bellini - or Artcraft can probably get it if you ask. Years ago Formulary used to sell a handy PMT/methanol solution but hasn't for a long time now.

There are some other more elaborate modifications once can make but PMT is the easiest and least nasty.

 

[Milpool]

Mill, we don't have to misremember, some of us can just go to boxes and pull out prints made on those papers ........

Maybe, but remember what Ansel said - the good old days are frequently the product of a failing memory.

I never used Polygrade V so perhaps I'm wrong. As for Picker's claims and products, Richard Henry dismantled those.

 

[GregY]

Maybe, but remember what Ansel said - the good old days are frequently the product of a failing memory.

I never used Polygrade V so perhaps I'm wrong. As for Picker's claims and products, Richard Henry dismantled those.

Regardless of Fred's hype.... Guillemot & Boespflug era Brilliant paper was very good. Forte Polygrade & Polygrade warmtone aren't old enough to be in the ancient history department. It closed down in 2007.....so many of us used it, and thankfully Foma somewhat filled that gap.

 

[Milpool]

Regardless of Fred's hype.... Guillemot & Boespflug era Brilliant paper was very good. Forte Polygrade & Polygrade warmtone aren't old enough to be in the ancient history department. It closed down in 2007.....so many of us used it, and thankfully Foma somewhat filled that gap.

I'm curious about the Foma papers. I've ordered a few of them to try.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Foma papers bear no resemblance to past Forte Polygrade III, IV, or V. It's almost impossible to get a cold tone from Foma "neutral tone" like one could developer and toner leverage Bergger "Netural, or Harman Fineprint, or Forte Polygrade. In other words, look to Foma for warm tone effects instead. I found Foma's "neutral" paper to be surprisingly resistant to toning, so lacking versatility in that respect.

Looks like some of you never had the opportunity to work with Fred Picker's Brilliant Bromide graded paper. Absolutely no other silver paper had such a high DMax. The curve was unusual too, and the went off the cliff into blackness pretty fast. It was a remarkable paper for certain images, with nothing else like it. If it were still around today, it would probably be awfully expensive. I have no idea who Richard Henry is, Milpool. Fred Picker made some patent medicine wagon claims about some of his products, but Brilliant paper certainly wasn't one of them; it was the real deal, and lots of printmakers of the right generation can confirm that.

Likewise, the popularity of 130 glycin developer didn't come out of a vacuum. For many, it has made a discernible difference in their own prints. Likewise, with staining pyro film developers. But there seem to be certain career skeptics who think they have everything figured out on a blackboard or calculator, but have never refined their own color visual
acuity. Yes - color vision has a heck of lot to do with black and white printmaking too. A person's own eyes might appreciate the subtle warm glow of glycin highlight stain in a print in a manner a densitometer simply cannot. Or it might detect the greenish bias in Dektol blacks, which is certainly not the olive tone of some of the old chloride contact papers, but is still discernible and potentially annoying in the wrong kind of image, or the wrong paper.

I suspect some of you are relying on closed-lop web rumors and half-baked magazine articles in several regards.

 

[GregY]

I'm curious about the Foma papers. I've ordered a few of them to try.

My friend photographer and fine printer Craig Richards https://www.craigrichardsphotography.com , who was at the time the head of photography at the Whyte Museum in Banff turned me on to Foma as my stash of Forte papers were dwindling. I think Argentix in Montreal still has a little in stock. I contacted the canadian distributor after the U.S. election....& was told their paper order are driven by retail orders.....so likely B&H & Freestyle are the go-to in N America.

 

[Milpool]

My friend photographer and fine printer Craig Richards https://www.craigrichardsphotography.com , who was at the time the head of photography at the Whyte Museum in Banff turned me on to Foma as my stash of Forte papers were dwindling. I think Argentix in Montreal still has a little in stock. I contacted the canadian distributor after the U.S. election....& was told their paper order are driven by retail orders.....so likely B&H & Freestyle are the go-to in N America.

I'm hoping toward the end of the summer to get to work trying the Foma papers - I ordered a bunch of them in 5x7 from B&H which is pretty much where I order everything from at this point.

 

[GregY]

Foma papers bear no resemblance to past Forte Polygrade III, IV, or V. It's almost impossible to get a cold tone from Foma "neutral tone" like one could developer and toner leverage Bergger "Netural, or Harman Fineprint, or Forte Polygrade. In other words, look to Foma for warm tone effects instead. I found Foma's "neutral" paper to be surprisingly resistant to toning, so lacking versatility in that respect.

Looks like some of you never had the opportunity to work with Fred Picker's Brilliant Bromide graded paper. Absolutely no other silver paper had such a high DMax. The curve was unusual too, and the went off the cliff into blackness pretty fast. It was a remarkable paper for certain images, with nothing else like it. If it were still around today, it would probably be awfully expensive. I have no idea who Richard Henry is, Milpool. Fred Picker made some patent medicine wagon claims about some of his products, but Brilliant paper certainly wasn't one of them; it was the real deal.

I suspect some of you are relying on closed-lop web rumors and half-baked magazine articles in several regards.

You're right Drew, they're not the same...... but they were the best replacement on the market in '07/08... certainly better than the available Ilford papers (Galerie excepted...but it was graded of course)...... Isn't it usually a case of buying the best you can find on the market at the time?
I got an unopened box of Polygrade V from the estate of a colleague in Banff..... totally fogged....almost made me cry!
I am running out the last of my Fortezo.....which was one of Jay Dusard's favourites.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Greg - if you like Foma papers for your own images, that's all that counts. They simply weren't the right shoe fit for me. I get far more versatility from having on hand just two papers : Ilford MGWT and MG Cooltone. Sure, I wish the old classics were still around : original Seagull G, Brilliant Bromide, Portriga, then later, Polygrade V and Harman Fineprint. I've actually tried all kinds of papers. I never found Galerie graded anywhere near as versatile for me personally as Seagull G; but it was a fine product and was still around, at least in Gr 3, until recently. My remaining stash of EMaks graded is finally starting to fog beyond remedy, another classic paper with its own personality.

I never thought much of Ilford MG IV, even though it was the mainstay of a lot of photographers. For me, their present trio of VC papers are far better, though Classic doesn't have quite enough punch for me.

What worked best for me in the hiatus of the first decade of the 21st C was Harman Fineprint VC - a relative sleeper most people didn't know about. But it worked splendidly for me. Another transient premium product, MCC, had a stubborn purplish brown tone which I couldn't get around. I also managed to fill in a little with what was left of Ilford Galerie graded, which remained highly predictable in continuity with previous decades.

I suspect there will be another paper selection drought on the horizon once the panic on precious metals commodities kicks in at the manufacture level. I don't know how many people are old enough to remember back when the Hunt brothers almost completely monopolized the silver commodities market, and it stopped printmakers cold in their tracks for awhile, unable to afford paper. Now there is a wild rush to invest in gold, silver, and platinum due to all the uncertainty over bonds, the stock market, tariffs, political instability, etc. I can only afford to stockpile a limited amount of paper in advance of the stampede; and it has already gone way way up in just the past couple of years ... another big wave to try to surf and survive, and hope an even worse wave isn't behind that one. Less frequent darkroom sessions for me, that's for sure. But I don't want to compromise the print quality itself.

 

[GregY]

Greg - if you like Foma papers for your own images, that's all that counts. They simply weren't the right shoe fit for me. I get far more versatility from having on hand just two papers : Ilford MGWT and MG Cooltone. Sure, I wish the old classics were still around : original Seagull G, Brilliant Bromide, Portriga, then later, Polygrade V and Harman Fineprint. I've actually tried all kinds of papers. I never found Galerie graded anywhere near as versatile for me personally as Seagull G; but it was a fine product and was still around, at least in Gr 3, until recently. My remaining stash of EMaks graded is finally starting to fog beyond remedy, another classic paper with its own personality.

I never thought much of Ilford MG IV, even though it was the mainstay of a lot of photographers. For me, their present trio of VC papers are far better, though Classic doesn't have quite enough punch for me.

What worked best for me in the hiatus of the first decade of the 21st C was Harman Fineprint VC - a relative sleeper most people didn't know about. But it worked splendidly for me. Another transient premium product, MCC, had a stubborn purplish brown tone which I couldn't get around. I also managed to fill in a little with what was left of Ilford Galerie graded, which remained highly predictable in continuity with previous decades.

I suspect there will be another paper selection drought on the horizon once the panic on precious metals commodities kicks in at the manufacture level. I don't know how many people are old enough to remember back when the Hunt brothers almost completely monopolized the silver commodities market, and it stopped printmakers cold in their tracks for awhile, unable to afford paper. Now there is a wild rush to invest in gold, silver, and platinum due to all the uncertainty over bonds, the stock market, tariffs, political instability, etc. I can only afford to stockpile a limited amount of paper in advance of the stampede; and it has already gone way way up in just the past couple of years ... another big wave to try to surf and survive, and hope an even worse wave isn't behind that one. Less frequent darkroom sessions for me, that's for sure. But I don't want to compromise the print quality itself.

Drew, MCC never did work for me. Current Ilford Warmtone is at the top of my list, as FOMA is spotty in availability. I do like FOMA Variant lll, and have a few boxes left.

 

[chuckroast]

Regardless of Fred's hype.... Guillemot & Boespflug era Brilliant paper was very good.

+100

I've printed on Velox, Kodabromide, Polycontrast, Opal, Ektalure, Agfa Brovira, Oriental Seagull, Forte, Adox, Bergger, MGVC, and now Fomabrom. As good as some of these were nothing came close to the look and touch of the original Brilliant grade.

It was an immense disappointment when they introduced a VC and it was nothing more than a repackaging of some other generic VC paper. I had so hoped to find the VC version of a paper with Brilliant graded's look and feel.

 

[Lachlan Young]

I think it's another one of those things... the fact Kodak, Ilford etc. had long since abandoned the use of glycin, it automatically acquired that requisite magic compound status.

The thing that people seem to want to ignore is that, with the synchem capacities Kodak, Ilford etc had, Glycin would have been very easy to make (compared to colour couplers). Considerably more interesting is Ilford's hints at the ways that Phenidones could be modified to deliver significant differences in print colour (especially to the warmer end).

nothing came close to the look and touch of the original Brilliant grade

If someone has a curve plot for it, I bet something similar can be found.

To take an example, a great deal of the myth about Azo was really about curve shape (and the MTF effects of a contact print).

 

[DREW WILEY]

Chuck - I don't think Galerie VC was just a rebranded product. It was certainly disappointing, and apparently was made by Ilford, but was a customized tweak for Calumet, who then controlled the Zone VI brand. I had to use supplementary unsharp masking to get the highlights to cooperate. But the VC version of Seagull was also a disappointment, at least for those of us accustomed to the original graded product.

 

[chuckroast]

If someone has a curve plot for it, I bet something similar can be found.

To take an example, a great deal of the myth about Azo was really about curve shape (and the MTF effects of a contact print).

It wasn't just the response curve it was the weight and tooth of the paper I've not seen reproduced in a silver paper since. Some inkjet papers come close but ... well ... it's not silver, I can't print properly on them.

 

[GregY]

The thing that people seem to want to ignore is that, with the synchem capacities Kodak, Ilford etc had, Glycin would have been very easy to make (compared to colour couplers). Considerably more interesting is Ilford's hints at the ways that Phenidones could be modified to deliver significant differences in print colour (especially to the warmer end).



If someone has a curve plot for it, I bet something similar can be found.

To take an example, a great deal of the myth about Azo was really about curve shape (and the MTF effects of a contact print).

a lot of the myth.... was the fact that it was a great contact paper...doesn't fog out with age.
I still have some and use it.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Azo did seem to last forever without fogging like a typical projection paper would.

Lachlan is our resident skeptic about everything. That's fine with me. Different viewpoints can be a healthy backboard to the ball court. None of it is going to change what I know works for me. I own a densitometer too, and certainly know how to use it; but it can't tell one everything relevant about a film or paper or developer.

 

[Milpool]

Did you try the "Oriental" VC paper that was around for a while until maybe 5-10 years ago? It didn't have anything to do with the older Oriental papers as far as I know but around 2007-2008 I used a lot of it for a portfolio and it seemed to be quite good. Despite a Japan label my understanding is it was actually made by Harman.

I liked the Fotoimpex/Adox MCC 110 paper but it seems unlikely that will be seen again.

Greg - if you like Foma papers for your own images, that's all that counts. They simply weren't the right shoe fit for me. I get far more versatility from having on hand just two papers : Ilford MGWT and MG Cooltone. Sure, I wish the old classics were still around : original Seagull G, Brilliant Bromide, Portriga, then later, Polygrade V and Harman Fineprint. I've actually tried all kinds of papers. I never found Galerie graded anywhere near as versatile for me personally as Seagull G; but it was a fine product and was still around, at least in Gr 3, until recently. My remaining stash of EMaks graded is finally starting to fog beyond remedy, another classic paper with its own personality.

I never thought much of Ilford MG IV, even though it was the mainstay of a lot of photographers. For me, their present trio of VC papers are far better, though Classic doesn't have quite enough punch for me.

What worked best for me in the hiatus of the first decade of the 21st C was Harman Fineprint VC - a relative sleeper most people didn't know about. But it worked splendidly for me. Another transient premium product, MCC, had a stubborn purplish brown tone which I couldn't get around. I also managed to fill in a little with what was left of Ilford Galerie graded, which remained highly predictable in continuity with previous decades.

I suspect there will be another paper selection drought on the horizon once the panic on precious metals commodities kicks in at the manufacture level. I don't know how many people are old enough to remember back when the Hunt brothers almost completely monopolized the silver commodities market, and it stopped printmakers cold in their tracks for awhile, unable to afford paper. Now there is a wild rush to invest in gold, silver, and platinum due to all the uncertainty over bonds, the stock market, tariffs, political instability, etc. I can only afford to stockpile a limited amount of paper in advance of the stampede; and it has already gone way way up in just the past couple of years ... another big wave to try to surf and survive, and hope an even worse wave isn't behind that one. Less frequent darkroom sessions for me, that's for sure. But I don't want to compromise the print quality itself.

 

[DREW WILEY]

The redux Oriental Seagull graded, under new ownership, did replicate the hue and toning qualities of the original quite well. But it lacked the same impact, for lack of a better way of stating it; and the Grade 4 version was a lackluster bellyflop. I was certainly disappointed with it, and even more disappointed with the VC version, but still did manage some very nice prints. Nowhere near as flexible as the original Seagull, despite being VC. Yet it too kept continuity with at least the special image tone of Seagull tradition. The quality control of the Seagull brand pretty much fell apart in recent years.

MCC 110 had its own native image tone, which was too confining for me personally; but it split toned decently (not as dramatic as MGWT).