Anyone only use graded FB paper?

[K-G]

I fully agree that we should try to go for the perfect negative, but how often do we succeed ? Also those negatives that are partly over or underexposed may be both beautifull and historicaly important treated the right way. Thats why I have VC-paper in stock in my darkroom but there is also a supply of Ilford Galerie , both grade 2 and 3 , for when the negative doesn't require any split filter printing ( yes , that happens even to me once in a while ) . After all nothing beats a good , uncomplicated negative printed on Ilford Galerie . Thats the best you can get in traditional silver gelatine photography.

Karl-Gustaf

 

[Paul Howell]

I admire photographers that use graded paper. I worked for a photographer that believes that VC paper is for those photographers that don't have their film processing down. He believes that photographers should "build" their negatives to fit the graded paper.


I find VC paper so much easier to use. I just discovered split grade printing and it's given me more control over shadows and highlights in prints. With such versatility of VC paper, I can't find an overwhelming reason to print on graded paper.

In days past that was very true, just that the papers I had matched my negatives in the 60s, 70, and 80 are no longer in production. Brovira, GAF, and Kodak along with Dupont VC followed by Seagull, Forte, modern Foma or Ilford do seem to match as well.


I use VC RC for working prints, although I don't do a lot of toning, I prefer the toned results from graded paper over VC. On the other hand as the choices of graded papers get fewer and fewer I may just move to VC FB as well.

 

[Vaughn]

What I really like about Ilfobrom Gallery FB paper is the white base and it gives very rich blacks with great mid tones. I'm not really into warm tone papers.

When I was printing on Ilford Gallerie (usually Grade 3) I did enjoy its neutral black when selenium toned. I found it took out what little warmth it had (in Dektol 1:3 for 4 minutes) and rendered the desert light very well...nice and clean. However for diving into the redwoods, I found it hard to beat Portriga Rapid III (Grade 3) with just enough selenium toning to take it from its slight green to a rich brown (stopping before going to red or purplish). Best in both worlds!

But I definitely tried to get negatives that best suit the paper, and paper grade. More by trial-and-lots-of-errors than solid testing. Still doing the same sort of thing with alt processes...feedback between the negative and the process while matching the process to my vision.

I suppose most alt processes would be considered "single-grade".

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

I really haven't

I fully agree that we should try to go for the perfect negative, but how often do we succeed ?

Especially for those that shoot roll film. When I was in college, my professor made us learn the Zone system and we had to adjust the film by where we placed our highlight zones. He was such a stickler that he shot 35mm with 3 cameras. One "N", one "N-1" and "N+1". I love the Zone system, but it's a master that serves it's slave. I will tweak film processing to a certain extent, but I'd rather adjust contrast with VC paper and filters.

 

[DREW WILEY]

I cut my teeth on graded paper and sheet film, so matching negative contrast to my favorite papers was easy. And back then VC papers were so-so at best. Now certain VC papers give stunning results. Certain of my early negs which were hell to print on graded paper have become easy to reprint, and look better too. Then there's the roll-film issue, where a desirable shot in the sequence might not match the others at all in terms of contrast, or might need a different scale of magnification on the enlarger. Then split toning. All kinds of things involved. So it's nice to have the choice. But I sure hope Ilfobrom Galerie sticks around, because there is still a need for a gutsy graded reasonably cold paper.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Vaughn, I hate to disappoint you, but while I was in the Ruby Mtns in Nevada, I heard some kid on the trail tell his girlfriend that the first
confirmed sighting of Bigfoot occurred there, not in the redwoods. Unfortunately, he never showed up on any of my 4x5 negatives. So now that we have documentation, it seems that Bigfoot has black fur, not brown; so it's OK to switch to cold-toned images for the sake of authenticity. And no, selfies don't count!

 

[canuhead]

...and for 20 years i only used blue box seagul grade 3+4 ( 8x10 and 11x14 )
....

god I miss this paper but not as much as Brilliant graded. I have a few boxes of Brilliant in 8x10 and 11x14 that I hope to use this winter. I'm liking Kentmere graded as well but find the edges are rather delicate and brittle if washed too long. Nothing a Rotatrim can't deal with

 

[removed account4]

god I miss this paper but not as much as Brilliant graded. I have a few boxes of Brilliant in 8x10 and 11x14 that I hope to use this winter. I'm liking Kentmere graded as well but find the edges are rather delicate and brittle if washed too long. Nothing a Rotatrim can't deal with

never used brilliant and i am sort of glad otherwise i would be even more sad

 

[DREW WILEY]

I wish I knew as much about toners as I do now, back when I worked with Seagull and Brilliant Bromide. I just used selenium back then.
But I did stumble onto a few unmounted old prints the other day to still experiment with, at least. Brilliant was an odd duck. As advertised, it
had "brutal" falloff in the shadows into rich DMax. I never found it as versatile as Seagull, but when it worked, it worked splendidly. I never
cared for Kentmere graded - anemic. But I still have some Kentmere Fineprint VC which can work wonders with the right developer and toner.

 

[Vaughn]

...So now that we have documentation, it seems that Bigfoot has black fur, not brown; so it's OK to switch to cold-toned images for the sake of authenticity. And no, selfies don't count!

Bummer! I do have this image of some young Bigfeet (Bigfoots?)...8x10 platinum print

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

Nice print!

Bummer! I do have this image of some young Bigfeet (Bigfoots?)...8x10 platinum print

I do Ziatypes and I admire your skill. You've got your process dialed in. Is this a hybrid neg?

 

[Vaughn]

I do Ziatypes and I admire your skill. You've got your process dialed in. Is this a hybrid neg?

I use in-camera negatives. The beasties have to hold still for 30 seconds or more in the redwoods (the longest was a 2 minute exposure). If my memory is correct, the image was taken on Ilford FP4+ and developed in Ilford PQ Universal developer.

My negatives are exposed and developed for the particular process they'll be printed in. Negatives for platinum/palladium prints are processed to use no contrast boosters in the coating solution or in the developer. If I wanted to make a carbon print of this scene, I would have given the film more development to increase the contrast even more. Sometimes I blow it and give the film too much development for pt/pd -- those negs often can make fine carbon prints! LOL!

This is an 8x10 carbon print -- this is the one they had to hold still for two minutes...

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

You're just like those photographers that shoot and process for graded paper

I use in-camera negatives. The beasties have to hold still for 30 seconds or more in the redwoods (the longest was a 2 minute exposure). If my memory is correct, the image was taken on Ilford FP4+ and developed in Ilford PQ Universal developer.

My negatives are exposed and developed for the particular process they'll be printed in. Negatives for platinum/palladium prints are processed to use no contrast boosters in the coating solution or in the developer. If I wanted to make a carbon print of this scene, I would have given the film more development to increase the contrast even more. Sometimes I blow it and give the film too much development for pt/pd -- those negs often can make fine carbon prints! LOL!

This is an 8x10 carbon print -- this is the one they had to hold still for two minutes...

I don't think I don't have my film process dialed in so I can print from my LF negs. I use my computer and make digital negs which is easier and cheating. It's amazing that you don't tweak the contrast of your PT emulsion to fit the contrast range of your neg. I've heard you can use different PT print developers to adjust your contrast. For Ziatypes, dichromates are used to adjust contrast and it's just too toxic for me. I'd rather use digital negs to tweak the contrast. Hat off to you!

 

[Vaughn]

You're just like those photographers that shoot and process for graded paper

That is why I was hoping I was not taking things off-topic. When I was teaching myself carbon printing it took about two years of making prints before I got the negative characteristics and the carbon printing process to a point where I was getting images I wanted. I might have done it in half the time if I did serious testing...but I do not like testing. Testing is great if you have an end result in mind, but since I had never seen a carbon print and did not know what they were 'suppose' to look like, I was just making carbons and judging the results from the qualities of the print. I found a raised relief in the wet carbon prints (that disappeared when dry) and started to tweak the negs and process to give me that relief in a dry print.

When my triplets were born I taught myself platinum printing because of the time-suck of carbon printing (I was a SAHD). I approached it the same way -- getting the negs and the process to line up to my vision. In any case, I have a lot of negatives that are not fit for printing and many many not-quite-good-enough prints. But every printing session was a learning experience, and one just has to get use to the fact that one might have several 12-hour printing sessions in a row and have no 'keepers' to show for it.

I do not think I would recommend my way of approaching a new process to anyone, but it works for me.

 

[Paul Howell]

I just order Slavich from B&H see how it takes to arrive.

 

[JoeyAnchors]

I just order Slavich from B&H see how it takes to arrive.

Very interested in hearing your thoughts on this paper.

 

[removed account4]

i was going to buy some vintage paper on ebay tonight
but the darn seller decided to photograph the paper inside the box

it was graded paper !

 

[Peter Schrager]

I used and still have a small stash
It's good stuff..try it for yourself is the best way to find out

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk

 

[Doremus Scudder]

I liked blue-box Oriental Seagull G a lot; really a lot. When it came back, it was never the same and recent incarnations were bad. Brilliant was great, I even liked the old Ilfobrom graded papers quite a bit (not Gallerie).

In the last few years I came to like E-Maks and Slavich a lot. E-Maks is gone and Slavich is harder to get now (but I'll definitely be stocking up on some when I get my new darkroom up and running!). In the meantime, it's Gallerie and Fomabrom. The latter, for some reason, has a bit yellower paper base (actually, I think it's the emulsion, but whites aren't as good as Gallerie and the old Seagull G).

I still try to use graded papers for lower-contrast prints (i.e., in the grade 1.5-3 range) since most VC papers still have a "bump" in the response curve in the midtones at these grades. However, many (Adox MC110 for example) perform superbly in the higher-contrast ranges.

FWIW, in another thread someone linked to an article about Adox acquiring a new coating line! Maybe Mirko would be willing to resurrect the old E-Maks graded papers or something similar?

Best,

Doremus

 

[Paul Howell]

I just order Slavich from B&H see how it takes to arrive.

Came in yesterdays mail, so 12 days, not bad, well packed. I order Single Wt glossy in metric size, standard, and some warm tone. The silk surface was not available, tonight I'll order 11X14.

 

[Paul Howell]

I used a fair amount of Slavich when it was available through Freestlye, reminds me of Agfa Broveria(sp?) tones well, the single wt can be used for making paper negatives, I like the single wt for hot mounting. Grade 2 seems normal, Dektol is fine, have not tried a cold tone developer. But you need a red safe light. If you want a 40s or 50s look try the warm tone, Slavich makes a silk texture warm tone, although listed by B&H its available.