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

[koraks]

Fomatone I find doesn't have the highest dmax and low contrast when compared to other papers

That may be a processing problem. Dmax of Fomatone is good, but you'll need to tone it (hence the name). The main limitation IMO is the paper base which is very off-white. That does cut back contrast of course, since you can't make a very bright white on a paper that's not white to begin with.

 

[cirwin2010]

That may be a processing problem. Dmax of Fomatone is good, but you'll need to tone it (hence the name). The main limitation IMO is the paper base which is very off-white. That does cut back contrast of course, since you can't make a very bright white on a paper that's not white to begin with.

I concur with your statement. Dmax is good, but not as great as MGFB when comparing untoned prints. At least I find this with developers such as liquidol and ansco 130. Moersch Se6 I found enhances dmax when compared to those options. It also increases contrast by about a grade bringing it more in like with MGFB in my experience.

The ivory highlights will also raise the dmin thus reducing apparently contrast and punch even if you could achieve the same dmax as MGFB. But that warm paper base is part of the appeal imo

 

[retina_restoration]

There were some great old papers. Anyone who says modern papers are better probably wasn't there or they are having memory issues.

Not better, no. In some cases, definitely not as good as papers from the 1970s/80s.

In the late 80s I printed almost exclusively on Agfa Portriga Rapid. It handled images differently than anything else I tried - you could not replicate the tonality you got on Portriga Rapid on any other paper. I have some Portriga Rapid left and have made prints on it in recent years, and compared it with Ilford’s Warmtone paper, and the Ilford paper doesn’t come close to what Portriga can do, and I’m not talking about the image color - I mean tonal rendering.
Fortunately, Fomatone Classic comes very close to emulating Portriga Rapid, so that’s what I use most of the time.

 

[brian steinberger]

I’m happy with the current Ilford offerings. Warmtone fiber has incredible depth but I prefer cooler images so I stick with classic for the most part, which I prefer to the older MGIV.

I do however miss how MGIV cooled in 1:9 selenium for 3-5min. The newer papers all just go magenta unless you add PMT to the developer or use something like Moersch SE6 Blue.

Some papers I do miss from the past: Forte polygrade V and Oriental VC. RIP

We should be thankful Ilford has continued to produce such fine papers.

 

[Lachlan Young]

The good old days are often the product of a failing memory.

Or fantasies about a past that never existed, fuelled by highly competent duo/tritone offset reproduction that made some prints out to be much more than they ever were in reality.

There was more selection. More choice when it came to image colour and toning properties, more surface types.

Only up to a point - wonder if they'd be so nostalgic if they realised that the variety of surfaces were often rather chintzy impressions of fabrics or high end mouldmade papers - and were often only available on limited (or one grade, if it was a 'portrait' paper) grades, and that some other papers had very drastic characteristic curve differences between some grades (owing to manufacturers trying to fill out the grade range on extant products - cf. Kodabromide). The other half of the mythos was simply that particular manufacturers were the first to achieve universally desirable results, like Agfa delivering a true grade 5 (by today's standards) on an enlarging paper, or Ilfobrom having a much more consistent character across grades (and such a close relationship to Multigrade that I suspect Ilford could very easily do a new Galerie if there was the market).

If @ADOX Fotoimpex can get Polywarmtone into a coating schedule (as a multigrade) that would be a big step to filling the only real gap in the market currently.

 

[Rick A]

I've settled in on Foma papers when I do traditional enlargements. These days about 90% of my darkroom work is alternate methods.

 

[Arthurwg]

Using Fomatone at the moment for prints that I intend to tone. True, contrast is poor, but the one problem I see is that the paper seems to pick up stains and "dirt". Nowhere near as robust as Ilford.

 

[william lester]

I’ve been printing on fibre based papers for over 40 years, mostly Ilford warm tone until switching to classic a few years ago. Mostly because of the price difference. For the past year I’ve been using Ilford Portfolio RC pearl. The surface sheen and slightly warm look are pleasing to me. Processing and washing are easy. Permanence is possibly a question but right now it’s my preferred paper. I know this doesn’t address the original question but thought I would mention it.

 

[Vaidotas]

Just returning to darkroom work (contact print) after ehhh… 20 years and my biggest surprise is that contemporary photo baryta graded paper offerings are on heavy paper base - no single weight?

 

[retina_restoration]

Just returning to darkroom work (contact print) after ehhh… 20 years and my biggest surprise is that contemporary photo baryta graded paper offerings are on heavy paper base - no single weight?

Not that I know of, no. That ship sailed long ago.

 

[tykos]

I mostly use MGFB, but recently tried some Fomabrom Variant 111 and thought it was pretty good - but not dramatically better/different than MGFB.

fomabrom is nice, main difference with ilford is that the latter has a bit more contrast on the highlights. And yeah, foma emulsion seems to be more delicate.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Quite a few people think MGWT is the best paper ever. It certainly is a great one. I pretty much standardize on that as well as MG Cooltone; and my only complaint is the rapid rise in price. Otherwise, I've experimented with all kinds of silver gelatin papers.

Sure, I wish that original Seagull G graded, Brilliant Bromide graded, and Portriga graded were still around; but the era of graded papers is over with, and in the meantime, really good VC papers have arisen; for me the first of those which really stood out was Polygrade IV then V. That's gone too now. Change just seems inevitable in this game. We adapt.

 

[Alan9940]

Nowadays I use mostly Ilford MGWT. Luckily, I bought a good supply of it many years ago before the current price hikes. Regarding papers of the past, I used Dupont Varigam, Ilford Ilfomar, Ilford Ilfobrom, Oriental Seagull, and the Zone VI graded paper. All very nice papers, but I sometimes wonder if the characteristics ascribed to these papers, at least for myself, is because I printed a lot more back in those days. Perhaps I was a better darkroom worker, then?

 

[pentaxuser]

The good old days are often the product of a failing memory.

Well as long as there is no danger of anyone telling me that Gary Cooper aided by Grace Kelly in "High Noon" didn't manage to kill the bad guys, I'll be happy

pentaxuser

 

[DREW WILEY]

Negatives which were hell to print back in graded days are downright easy now on today's premium VC papers. But I'm glad I got to experience the special look of numerous papers of the past.

 

[brian steinberger]

I’ve been printing on fibre based papers for over 40 years, mostly Ilford warm tone until switching to classic a few years ago. Mostly because of the price difference. For the past year I’ve been using Ilford Portfolio RC pearl. The surface sheen and slightly warm look are pleasing to me. Processing and washing are easy. Permanence is possibly a question but right now it’s my preferred paper. I know this doesn’t address the original question but thought I would mention it.

RC portfolio is very nice. But it’s currently priced higher than classic, but not as much as warmtone.

 

[brian steinberger]

Just returning to darkroom work (contact print) after ehhh… 20 years and my biggest surprise is that contemporary photo baryta graded paper offerings are on heavy paper base - no single weight?

I may be an outlier but I would love to see Ilford release classic as single weight. Even if only available in one sheen and one or two sizes. It would be great for photo albums! I can only dream….

 

[Milpool]

The duotone etc. is an interesting point. That certainly warped my early impression of what great B&W prints (in particular from LF negatives) looked like, and I was wrong big time, much to my disappointment (which a few smart people warned me of) but also to my relief.

There were some papers I liked a lot. Seagull was good. Galerie was a really nice paper although I also liked Elite which some people hated for some reason. Portriga was nice. My father liked Medalist a lot for some things.

But they weren’t “better” than current Harman when it comes to actual tone reproduction or micro whatever.

Or fantasies about a past that never existed, fuelled by highly competent duo/tritone offset reproduction that made some prints out to be much more than they ever were in reality.


Only up to a point - wonder if they'd be so nostalgic if they realised that the variety of surfaces were often rather chintzy impressions of fabrics or high end mouldmade papers - and were often only available on limited (or one grade, if it was a 'portrait' paper) grades, and that some other papers had very drastic characteristic curve differences between some grades (owing to manufacturers trying to fill out the grade range on extant products - cf. Kodabromide). The other half of the mythos was simply that particular manufacturers were the first to achieve universally desirable results, like Agfa delivering a true grade 5 (by today's standards) on an enlarging paper, or Ilfobrom having a much more consistent character across grades (and such a close relationship to Multigrade that I suspect Ilford could very easily do a new Galerie if there was the market).

 

[Milpool]

Good point. The old graded papers were certainly good and the variety was useful but once VC really came into its own that was a new tool, so we lost some things but gained in other ways.

Negatives which were hell to print back in graded days are downright easy now on today's premium VC papers. But I'm glad I got to experience the special look of numerous papers of the past.

 

[Alan9940]

There were some papers I liked a lot. Seagull was good. Galerie was a really nice paper although I also liked Elite which some people hated for some reason.

I tried and tried to like Elite, but just never cared for it. I found the base color to be too blue(ish) and the overall tonality was...meh. Toning it helped a bit, but... I was sure it was just me because this was John Sexton's favorite paper. How could I not like it? Hmm, reminds me that I, also, didn't particularly care for TMax 100, either.

 

[miha]

At that difference I would use the Ilford paper as well. Around here Ilford is like 60-70% more expensive or so (comparing MGWT 8x10" to Fomabrom 111 100 sheet packs). Of course, this is likely because we're spoiled with Foma being a mainland EU producer, so we get to enjoy comparatively low cost for their papers. Ilford needs to be imported; for you, both papers need to be imported and then there's the special rates issue.

I wouldn’t compare Fomabrom III to MG FB Warmtone. Fomabrom is equivalent to Ilford FB Classic (Ilford Warmtone would be equivalent to Fomatone), and when comparing Fomabrom III to Ilford FB Classic prices, the difference is that Ilford is about one third more expensive, not 60–70% as you suggested.

 

[koraks]

the difference is that Ilford is about one third more expensive

I think on fotoimpex it's still close to 50% or so. I haven't specifically looked for the lowest price for either. Either way, the difference is significant and it's a lot bigger here in Europe than over in the US. We can argue until the cows come home about the last % but it doesn't change much about the bigger picture IMO.

 

[miha]

I think on fotoimpex it's still close to 50% or so. I haven't specifically looked for the lowest price for either. Either way, the difference is significant and it's a lot bigger here in Europe than over in the US. We can argue until the cows come home about the last % but it doesn't change much about the bigger picture IMO.

Luckily, that’s not the case. At Fotoimpex it’s €118 vs €160. Fomatone vs Ilford Warmtone comes in at €174 vs €198. Just setting things straight.

 

[snusmumriken]

I know what the OP meant, and concur to an extent, but ... I don't miss keeping 5 or 6 boxes of graded paper; and while I liked to try different papers back along, nowadays I appreciate the consistent 'look' that I get by sticking with the one Ilford MG Classic.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

I bounced between Ilford MG, Oriental Seagull, and Forte Polygrade V. My favourite was Polygrade V. You could do wonderful things to it in Selenium. Seagull toned decently, and Ilford was stubborn...but still a beautiful paper. I admit I haven't bought any photo papers since Polygrade V was discontinued. I did buy a box of Ilford RC recently. Nice stuff...but not fond of RC.
I still have a 16x10 fibre base box of Polygrade in the freezer, and Seagull...but scared to crack them open. Probably fogged beyond usefulness... I could use them for Carbon Transfer, though...