Benefit to FB paper

[ajuk]

I think I know what FB paper is, it is paper lacking a resin coating on the back so the paper its self soaks up chemicals and thus needs a lot more rinsing?, so what is the benefit to not having this coating, especially if the end result is in a frame?

 

[dancqu]

A lot more rinsing? What say if FB took no more
rinsing than RC? I've not worked with RC for some
time and have not made direct comparisons with FB.
I have though employed with FB papers a Least water
method of washing which in total amount of water
used is, I believe, very nearly no more than
I was using with RC.

Apart from the amount of water used are issues of
paper weight and ease of handling. Also there is
a greater selection of Graded papers in FB. Dan

 

[removed account4]

it used to be said that fiber based papers were more archivally stable
than resin coated papers, but according to the image permanency institute
and kodak, they suggest the opposite is true and that resin coated papers
if processed correctly may be more stable than fiber papers.

in the end it is just about what you like.
resin papers are light and kind of plastic-y, fiber papers are paperish and heavier.
years ago ilford used to make a rc paper that was "double weight" called
"portfolio" if they still make it ... that paper is about as close to fiber paper as an rc paper can get ... if that makes sense ..

have fun!
john

 

[L Gebhardt]

It's the surface that makes me use FB paper. Glossy FB has a texture. Glossy RC is perfectly smooth. Your best bet is to get ahold of a FB print.

 

[tony lockerbie]

Fibre paper just feels better. I use RC for proofing and quick throw-in-the-drawer type prints. I would never use RC for pictures that will be framed, due to past bad experiences with the RC bronzing and silvering out...quite quickly in some cases. It may be improved these days, but once bitten....

 

[Steve Smith]

I'm the opposite of most people. I have never been able to get fibre paper to dry flat enough.

I agree that the RC gloss is too glossy but the pearl finish (or is it satin?) Ilford RC paper is nice.


Steve.

 

[clayne]

Make some prints on fiber paper and you'll see what the fuss is about. There is probably no surface available on FB paper that looks bad - they all look good.

 

[Marc Leest]

I'm the opposite of most people. I have never been able to get fibre paper to dry flat enough.

I agree that the RC gloss is too glossy but the pearl finish (or is it satin?) Ilford RC paper is nice.


Steve.

Getting FB flat is pure technique, if you don't have a FB press.
I have started out printing FB from the beginning and have never looked back. I use only RC for quick evaluation prints.

PS. It's the same technique aquarellists use to get their paintings flat.

 

[ajuk]

I just got a 100 pack of Kentmere Bromide in 3.5x5.5" for £1 and I was thinking of selling it, even if I do like FB paper, it's a bit small.

 

[Tom Kershaw]

Ajuk,

The various fibre base papers can respond differently to your negatives. In some cases, it can be a case of matching the negative to the paper. Adox MCC, ILFORD Multigrade FB, MGWT, Ilfobrom Galerie et al are worth trying. Use a consistent developer between the papers, e.g. PQ Universal or Fotospeed PD-5.

Tom

 

[paul_c5x4]

I just got a 100 pack of Kentmere Bromide in 3.5x5.5" for £1 and I was thinking of selling it, even if I do like FB paper, it's a bit small.

Just the right size for the postcard exchange.

 

[ajuk]

Hey I'll be happy to do that, although I've printed postcard markings onto RC paper before with my inkjet. I have also got a some Ilford MGWT (RC) in 7x5" for £8 from Firstcall, I intend to print some of it tomorrow, Anybody know what this stuff does in Ilford CT developer?

 

[Tony Egan]

Once you go fibre you can never go back! I use glossy RC for proof sheeting 35mm negs but that's about it. Once or twice in the last 10 years I've flirted with RC but you are always left looking at a print saying, that's not as good as it could be.

 

[naugastyle]

I'm more in the middle. I love fiber, am fascinated by how different papers are brand to brand, love how beautifully it tones. I agree that framed prints should be on fiber. But doesn't anyone here print snapshots of their friends and family? I would never use fiber for that. It's much too expensive, the recipients won't notice the difference, and unless it's some particularly special memory, people generally prefer to receive 4x6s which can be put into any commercially-available album...not many fiber papers at that size. (and yes, you could cut larger papers down but again...expensive!)

 

[Ronald Moravec]

FB glossy is originally designed to be ferrotyped on a chrome plate to a high gloss almost like RC glossy . This has not be done in general for decades.

However if you air dry or blotter dry, a nice shean is produced that is better looking than any RC surface.

The trick is getting it flat.

 

[phenix]

I think I know what FB paper is, it is paper lacking a resin coating on the back...

On the front too! Moreover, instead of the front resin layer (like with the RC), FB have the emulsion coated on a baryta layer. The main difference between the two papers is given by the way the resin or the baryta layers are revealing the blacks and the gray tones. And this difference is significant. Therefore I use RC up to 8x10 only, and FB starting with 11x14.

 

[clayne]

I'm more in the middle. I love fiber, am fascinated by how different papers are brand to brand, love how beautifully it tones. I agree that framed prints should be on fiber. But doesn't anyone here print snapshots of their friends and family? I would never use fiber for that. It's much too expensive, the recipients won't notice the difference, and unless it's some particularly special memory, people generally prefer to receive 4x6s which can be put into any commercially-available album...not many fiber papers at that size. (and yes, you could cut larger papers down but again...expensive!)

On the flip-side, back in Malaysia, some of the family members I showed their own portraits to asked me "What kind of paper is this? It's different."

I can't say I absolutely never use RC, but for any print I care about I tend to use FB. The unfortunate part is that I don't tend to print what I don't care about these days. I have a bunch of MCP if you want some, seriously. It's a good paper, but I can't get into the plastic feel of RC. I do use RC for some test runs though, i.e. "is it possible to print this?"

 

[rodneyAB]

I'm doing a search on FB for 'flattening' technique. I have printed exactly one FB sheet last nite, in my makeshift darkroom where I have printed less than a hundred sheets of RC this month of march, self-teaching trial and error. Although I like the apparent ease of RC, especially in that they dry flat in my atmosphere, I immediately like the 'slower' or longer time in the Dektol . I clearly want to be printing FB, but figure I can ramp up slowly to it, by makeing my mistakes with RC.

 

[Ektagraphic]

Once you go fibre you can never go back!

Oh so true!! I love fiber. Just give it a try. There certainly are some places for RC and some places for fiber. I use both now but when I get a dry mount press this weekend, I will certainly do nearly all fiber. Just use a washing agent and you won't have to wash very long.

 

[Vaughn]

As a print maker, the qualities of the material is of great importance -- how it feels, surface quality, image quality, etc. Just because I might put it behind glass does not change any of that for me. And if your prints are in a portfolio case at a gallery (only a small proportion of work at a gallery is behind glass) or just sharing images with other photographers and friends -- then the qualities of the print can/will be examined.

 

[kauffman v36]

like other have said, once you go fiber you dont go back. get a pack of the very popular ilford mgiv 8x10 glossy and give it a try. while not my fav. FB paper it certainly invites you to the FB world with great beauty. MC110, Variotone, MGWT, and MGIV, all great papers unmatched by any RC paper IMO.