Are We Really Stuck With Ilford MGFB? Where Are the Magic Papers of the Past?

Don_ih said:

That makes me assume you've never used Ansco 130.

Click to expand...

The more accurate statement is that you haven't used D163 (without the errors of oral history misremembrance) and are assuming yourself more knowledgeable than the research teams of Kodak, Ilford, Agfa etc, all of whom could and would have used glycin in print developers, if it actually had any real effects visible in blind print testing. On the other hand, Phenidone and derivatives do have useful effects that are clearly visible, and can be exploited through optimal PQ ratios, and modified through powerful restrainers like 1-Phenyl-5-Mercapto-Tetrazole. If it had been necessary, these manufacturers would have outright synthesised specific developer components (and there's Ilford patents from the 1990s that hint rather strongly at possible reasons why the Harman Warmtone developer has not made it back to the market yet, and why the MSDS is a bit unclear).

It isn't particularly difficult to get what people with very limited experience imagine can only be possible with 130 with other developers using very conventional ingredients.

Chromium VI said:

Fomabrom Variant 111, It's a non-supercoated paper

Click to expand...

Is this a good paper for Carbro?

Lachlan Young said:

On the other hand, Phenidone and derivatives

Click to expand...

But there's no phenidone in D163. It's an MQ developer - not much different from Dektol. I don't assume I know more than the Kodak, Ilford, Agfa researchers. Glycin has a problematic shelf life and is difficult to dissolve - it's not a great powder to have mixed into an off-the-shelf (or by-the-barrel) developer (which are the types of products those researchers were interested in).

Lachlan Young said:

It isn't particularly difficult to get what people with very limited experience imagine can only be possible with 130 with other developers using very conventional ingredients.

Click to expand...

There are plenty of people with very extensive experience that think Ansco 130 gives them something they can't get from anything else. I'll refrain from responding appropriately to your particularly condescending way of phrasing that.

Incidentally, D163 seems to have been marketed mainly as a tropical paper developer.

not a bad choice to be stuck with

Well I gotta promote the other guy. I use Fomatone MG-WT-132 fibre and if you do it right - it's beautiful. No green cast. I use Moersch SE2- WT developer 1:20 and well, I guess it depends on whether you are after the Paul Strand blacks and whites and midtones aka Ansel Adams look, or the soft creamy pictorial on silver gelatin look. I prefer the warmtones I can get with the Fomatone/Moersch. If I can figure out how to upload without making the images too big or too small I'll post a few. I read every word and tested the print exposure/developer combinations that Wolfgang Moersch suggests and wouldn't trade it for anything. But thats just imho.

Raghu Kuvempunagar said:

Is this a good paper for Carbro?

Click to expand...

I heard someone that used it for Bromoil. It has a really delicate emulsion, once I printed a portrait on this paper, and a person that saw me put the paper on the rack just lift it by the corner, the emulsion was completely removed by the finger. I guess it should work well for carbro/ozobrome (I've been willing to try for some months).

I use a standard fixed with hardener with Foma FB papers, don't have issues with emulsions peeling or flaking off. If you use a rapid fixer might be worthwhile to add a hardener.

My fix: a sign near the racks: "Do NOT TOUCH, Very fragile FB paper". Never happened again! The person shouldn't touch others works in the 1st place.

djkloss said:

I use Fomatone MG-WT-132 fibre and if you do it right - it's beautiful.

Click to expand...

For those who care about print materiality (which is a different thing from those with visions of magic papers from a past that never was), it's spectacular. And it bleaches, tones etc very well. I just wish there was enough demand to coat it on the base colour of 532. Same with Retrobrom's base colour, though I understand the desire to pay tribute to papers of the past that had a connection with Sudek and the like.

The Harman made Bergger warmtone semi-gloss is also very good in a similar-ish vein. The Harman made WT that was done for Moersch was also excellent, but seemed to suffer from an audience who apparently stamped their feet (or who were going to stamp their feet, no matter what, and never intended to buy it anyway) that it wasn't an exact replica of Polywarmtone.

Compared to only having Record Rapid/ Portriga in 3-4 grades and a few 'portrait' type papers in a single grade, there are some considerably more flexible papers on the market now.

It would seem that an added hardener would make SpotTone etc dye retouching and spotting more difficult (??)

DREW WILEY said:

It would seem that an added hardener would make SpotTone etc dye retouching and spotting more difficult (??)

Click to expand...

I do sometimes use Formalin Hardner (be careful, is very toxic), sadly here in Portugal chrome alum is almost impossible to find, and formaldehyde is very cheap and readily available. It does add some strength to the emulsion, and wouldn't use it if I'm planning to spot, but it doesn't turn gelatin into plastic, nor makes it impossible to work on.

Also, here in Portugal, paper selection is very small, and I've always worked with I had on hand, and could afford. I do have preferences, but when I don't have the results I'm hopping for I can use reducers, toners, intensifiers to get near there. Also, I know with what I'm working with and plan my photos on that. I would trust that most papers made nowadays are of very high quality (FB or RC) and in any case, and if you do careful processing and have good preventive conservation practices, images will outlast our lives with very little or no change at all. That's just my opinion about papers, and I'm sure that there will be other opinions out there (that I do respect, and I will learn new things from them).
For me, if it allows you to work with your tools, and just doesn't turn all crazy in a few years, it's fine paper.