Best paper for a newbie without an enlarger

[Francesco_from_Rome]

Hi, I would like to progress to printing my bw photographs. As a first step I thought about contact printing: this has also the advantage (I hope) to free me from the scanner which I currently use to evaluate the negatives to be printed by a lab.
I don't particularly like the scanner for the difficulty of focusing and of keeping it clear enough (highly detailed scansion of dirt are my bane...).

I've read that Azo paper and its "descendants" are particularly nice (Lodima, Foma...?) but for starting I would like to keep the cost low since I am beginning and will surely do many silly errors. Can you please tell me if there's some kind of features in usual photographic paper that I should be aware when deciding which to buy?

I don't have an enlarger and I will contact print 6x4.5 and 35 mm negatives.

I have a Paterson develop + print kit so I should be reasonably set on the trays and accessories.

I think this is probably a FAQ, but I wasn't able to find an answer by searching, I missed the right keywords. So if you prefer, a link to other threads would be fine, too.

Thanks,
Francesco

 

[goros]

Hi Francesco,

As a quick reply, I would tell you to use a reasonably cheap RC paper, as Fomaspeed Variant 311. Quick to dry and drying flat.

http://www.fomafoto.com/index.php/v...d/fomaspeed-variant-311-24x30-5cm-50pc-detail

The sheet size I have chosen is more or less A4, but the size must be as per the way you lay the negative strips on the paper.

 

[David Allen]

I agree, Foma papers are very good and economical.

You can also order from Foto Impex in Berlin:

http://www.fotoimpex.de/shopen/phot...ss-rc-24x30-50-sheets-gradation-variable.html

Bests,

David.
www.dsallen.de

 

[paul_c5x4]

I've read that Azo paper and its "descendants" are particularly nice (Lodima, Foma...?) but for starting I would like to keep the cost low

Lodima paper is very expensive, especially once you've added in the cost of shipping from the USA to Italy. Fomalux is quite a bit cheaper, but it would pay to shop around - Like the Lodima paper, Fomalux is a fixed grade paper, so may not be the best choice..

I would also recommend starting out with an RC paper such as the Ilford MGRC IV. With a plain white lamp, it will give you a nominal grade 2, all be it, quite a bit faster than Lodima or Fomalux.

 

[Francesco_from_Rome]

Lodima paper is very expensive, especially once you've added in the cost of shipping from the USA to Italy. Fomalux is quite a bit cheaper, but it would pay to shop around - Like the Lodima paper, Fomalux is a fixed grade paper, so may not be the best choice..

I would also recommend starting out with an RC paper such as the Ilford MGRC IV. With a plain white lamp, it will give you a nominal grade 2, all be it, quite a bit faster than Lodima or Fomalux.

Ok. So I get the idea that a good starting point will be an RC paper like Ilford or Foma, whatever cost less. And I will begin to experiment with the lightbulb in my bathroom....

I can't wait to make some real print, even if "only" contact from a small negative ...

Francesco

 

[Christopher Walrath]

There are probably quite a few papers that contact print well. I have been using my Orient Seagull VC/RC-II glossy paper for contact printing my negatives and it does very well. And the 4x5 negatives are treated fairly by the process.

 

[bdial]

Light control without a timer may be a bit of a challenge with enlarging papers. A night-light or similar dim light might work well though.

 

[Francesco_from_Rome]

Light control without a timer may be a bit of a challenge with enlarging papers. A night-light or similar dim light might work well though.

Ah, that's a great idea since - being father to 2 small kids - I'm well stocked on night light. But those are typically not suspended, rather plugged in a socket in a wall. Wouldn't this lead to uneven lighting?

Francesco

 

[Christopher Walrath]

Lower wattage bulb.

Look, this is how Edward Weston used to make 8x10 contact prints. I'm sure you'll figure it out. And make the move to 8x10 while you're at it.

 

[Francesco_from_Rome]

Lower wattage bulb.

Look, this is how Edward Weston used to make 8x10 contact prints. I'm sure you'll figure it out. And make the move to 8x10 while you're at it.

Thanks for the encouragement.
I'm in a phase of my photographic life where I'm trying to convince myself that I should stop adding gear and should use better what I have. On the other hand, I'm also sure that I'd like a LF camera...
The paradox is resolved by the fact that my wife would kill me if I were so bold to bring another camera in our house (presumably beating me with the aforementioned LF camera). So for the time being I will try to channel EW spirit by contact printing the negatives that I can expose with my current cameras

Francesco

ps: or maybe I could try a pinhole camera??? that shouldn't cost too much !

 

[Nodda Duma]

If you are wanting to make your own prints, then you should look around for a cheap enlarger. It doesn't hurt to look, right? I would bet that you can find one for a very reasonable price.

Besides, enlargers are usually heavier than a LF camera, so you will be knocked unconscious faster when your wife beats you with it!

 

[paul_c5x4]

And make the move to 8x10 while you're at it.

Why stop at 10x8 when Ilford can supply 20x24 cut sheets or (nominally) 1mx30m rolls. A Cirkut camera using rolls that size would be awesome

Besides, enlargers are usually heavier than a LF camera, so you will be knocked unconscious faster when your wife beats you with it!

If it is a sturdy enough enlarger, she may have trouble picking it up, let alone swinging it.

Joking aside, I'm still keeping my eyes open for a cheap (free ?) one, but I fear shipping costs to Italy may scupper any deal.

 

[Francesco_from_Rome]

If you are wanting to make your own prints, then you should look around for a cheap enlarger. It doesn't hurt to look, right? I would bet that you can find one for a very reasonable price.

Besides, enlargers are usually heavier than a LF camera, so you will be knocked unconscious faster when your wife beats you with it!

Nodda Duma, you touch a sore point.... I think that my first post here on APUG was about an enlarger.

But the "wife factor" is the main one: I would probably overexpose all the prints by being knocked out!

Francesco

 

[bdial]

It is not what would be considered a newbie endeavor these days, but you may want to consider alt processes like salt prints, albumen or plat. palladium. These are all contact print processes, and you only need the sun for exposure. You also don't need a true darkroom, but there is more chemistry to deal with, since you must make the emulsion.

 

[Francesco_from_Rome]

It is not what would be considered a newbie endeavor these days, but you may want to consider alt processes like salt prints, albumen or plat. palladium. These are all contact print processes, and you only need the sun for exposure. You also don't need a true darkroom, but there is more chemistry to deal with, since you must make the emulsion.

Bdial, the suggestion is interesting but I would like to keep the chemicals at the minimum possible level since I have small children in the house. By the way, when they were considered "newbie endeavours"? If that is the case, I can only conclude that it's true that each generation is less capable than the preceding one... :-(

Francesco

 

[GKC]

If you have a regular safe light just remove the filter and....there you go!
You'll still need a safe light though. Amber night lights are a possibility, as would be a short string of red led Christmas lights (makes for a festive atmosphere in the dark room!)

 

[paul_c5x4]

Francesco - Whilst browsing the stock of my local drug dealer (second hand camera shop), I came across a small gadget that would help you on your way. The glass measures a nominal 6x9, but would be better suited to using with 6x7 or smaller negatives. If you're interested, I'll weigh it and work out how much it would cost to ship to Rome.

 

[nede]

I play with fomalux sp111, FB grade2 paper, with a 15W bulb 80cm away from paper I get 50s exposure

Really like it!

 

[Molli]

Francesco - Whilst browsing the stock of my local drug dealer (second hand camera shop), I came across a small gadget that would help you on your way. The glass measures a nominal 6x9, but would be better suited to using with 6x7 or smaller negatives. If you're interested, I'll weigh it and work out how much it would cost to ship to Rome.

I have one of these and have used it with little 2.5"x2.5" and 2.5"x3.5" Kodak Velox Contact Paper. The paper is mostly from the 60s (I believe), single weight and makes rather cute prints. Since it's a contact/gaslight paper, it's very slow and I've used it in my little contact printer whilst sitting on the loungeroom floor of an evening around dusk. In other words, it doesn't need to be pitch black or under dim red safelight. Print times were between six and ten seconds depending on the density of the negative. I've also used it beneath a piece of glass beneath a bare 75 Watt light bulb sitting around two and a half feet away.

The paper turns up on ebay on a fairly regular basis. If Paul sends you that Paterson printer, I'll happily send you a little packet of paper (2.5"x3.5"). It's only a pack of twenty five - (minus one or two so I can check it for fogging - see 6x9 print for example), but it will give you something to play with

 

[DREW WILEY]

There's no rationale for buying an expensive contact-only paper just to proof tiny negatives. Just get some basic easy to develop cheap paper
like Ilford MGIV RC. Now if you happen to really like what you see, you might want to spread your wings with either a bigger camera or
an enlarger and fancier paper.

 

[michael9793]

AS you have seen people tell you use enlarging paper but if you are beginning that is the hardest way to start. enlarging paper are way way to fast for contact printing. even if you use a 7.5 watt bulb at 5 feet. start with the right papers and stick with them. no use crippling yourself right out of the box. By the time you figure out how to do it with enlarging papers you will spend as much money trying to relearn the process using the right papers. If you cant afford it don't do it. may be palladium print would be easier.

 

[baachitraka]

I may try to find an enlarger capable upto 6x6. I have picked one from Durst for less than €80 including two lenses.

35mm only enlargers can be even cheaper.

 

[John51]

Would something like an led torch be weak enough to give decent control for contact printing?

To have fun without chemicals, solar paper might be the answer:

http://shop.silverprint.co.uk/Silverprint-Solar-Paper-5x7-Inch-35-Sheets/product/2172/2172/

 

[hamradio]

Try RC Fomalus is quite cheap in the states ($20 for 100 5x7 sheets), and I imagine similar in your location. That would let you play with contact-speed paper without breaking the bank.

 

[removed account4]

woops!