I've been trying to obtain slightly colder (or less warm) tones from Foma Variant 111, compared to what I'm currently using.
Which is : either D-72 or ID-62. They give identical (to me) results.
Tried a modified ID-62 with no KBr and 2x benzotriazole. Still no difference in a side-by-side comparison of step wedges.
Then I came across this old Ilford leaflet (see below). From the time HP4 was still around and the dinosaurs... According to that, PQU is "neutral to warm", while Bromophen is "neutral", and even "attenuates the warm tone of Ilfomar". While there seems to be a consensus that PQU is more or less ID-62, I have not come across a reliable Bromophen equivalent.
Maybe modern papers have their tonality baked in more than in the past? Or, is there a way to cool down somewhat currently available neutral-tone papers?
View attachment 372479
- Ilford cold tone not an option, too difficult to procure
- glycin too expensive and degrades upon storage
- I had a good experience a long time ago with Eukobrom, but I strongly suspect that now it's just a name (like APX-100) and am reluctant to put down 25+€ just to find out; plus it is out of stock in EU, including fotoimpex.
- please no formulas copied from old collections of formulas; I've read them
- personally tested formulas are welcome
Sorry, I guess I was skimming too fast.... @Doremus Scudder : I need to cool the tone of Fomabrom 111, which I find slightly on the warm side. I already use occasionally selenium toning (T55) that produces (in my eyes) eggplant tones. What I was aiming for in my question is neutral to blue-black tones.
Pointing out the bleeding obvious - how about replacing the phenidone in ID62 with metol?
First : Do not expand the thumbnails until you have performed the blind test.Pointing out the bleeding obvious - how about replacing the phenidone in ID62 with metol?
If you use a Warm tone paper like Fomatone 111. then you are going to get warm results. Extending development time will help kill the warmth slightly.
Ian
In fact a warmer toned paper can tend to shift even more toward cold/blue-black than a neutral/cold paper when PMT is added to a developer.
What's PMT?
Thanks
pentaxuser
I really don't think tweaking developers is going to get you very far. Even if you find a formulation that makes a difference, it is likely to be small. A lot of the Fomabrom's "warm" tone comes from the color of the emulsion itself. I'm not talking about the silver image, but the transparent gelatin, which is slightly orange/yellow. Take a moment to compare the unexposed borders on a Fomabrom 111 print with, say Ilford MG Classic or Cooltone. That tint affects the entire image to a certain extent....
Now expand the first thumbnail. Which strip(s) looks warmer? colder? For an objective assessment, I opened the image in Picture Window Pro, and used the eyedropper to sample step #12 in the four strips. The second attached image is a (zoomed-in) representation of the the hue-saturation space. The small circle is "white". The symbol slightly to the upper right is the cluster of the four samples. Virtually identical.
...
Let's start from here, since that is where you formulated definite question(s).I guess my question is, what are you trying to accomplish here? Make a cooler-toned print or research developer formulations? Or are you somehow stuck with Fomabrom?
YesMake a cooler-toned print
Noresearch developer formulations
As concerns Ilford. Gave up on MGIV because of (a) price (b) unresponsive to Se toning. MGV aka Classic maybe better Re: Se toning but (prices from fotoimpex):I'm not sure why you are stuck on one paper. There are others to try that might immediately give you better (cooler) results without going to all the trouble you are going to. Bergger NB might be worth looking at in addition to both the Ilford MG Classic and Cooltone.
I repeated the same process as in my post #11 above, but this time Ilford MG IV versus Fomabrom 111 variant (previous tests kept on file). Both developed in D-72. This time I sampled step #28. Top is MGIV, bottom Fomabrom 111. Disregard the Hue/Sat numbers above the colormap; I guess they reflect the position of the mouse. This measurement does not support your statement. Maybe my MGIV was old, but definitely the Fomabrom 111 is neutral relative to the calibration strip of my V700.A lot of the Fomabrom's "warm" tone comes from the color of the emulsion itself. I'm not talking about the silver image, but the transparent gelatin, which is slightly orange/yellow. Take a moment to compare the unexposed borders on a Fomabrom 111 print with, say Ilford MG Classic or Cooltone. That tint affects the entire image to a certain extent.
Feedback.
In the meantime, I have received some Moersch Blue Finisher and made tests. Fomabrom variant 111. Stouffer step wedge 0.1D steps. ID-62 1+2 2min @22°C. Amounts 0, 5ml, 10ml per litre of working solution.
Executive summary. It works. Thanks to all those who gave positive input, especially @Milpool who gave an effective solution already in post #3.
Below the test strips. Scanned as 48-bit tif, then as final step resized and converted to jpg for forum display. First as-scanned, next with saturation enhanced to +50 (whatever that means) in PictureWindowPro. Repeat for those who practice speed reading: Amounts 0, 5ml, 10ml per litre of working solution.
Also repeat what I wrote in a previous post: no claim to absolute colorimetry. Here, neutral white is defined by the cal strip of my V700. This said, the rendition on my screen agrees with the in-person viewing of the strips: Fomabrom "as-is" has warm tones (the intermediate values). At 5ml/l of Blue Finisher, mostly neutral tones, only-so-slightly on the cold side. Speed loss @5ml/l about 2 wedge steps, i.e. 2/3 stops. @10ml/l twice as much.
Not that I'm bothered by the speed loss, but I'll try halving the amount and see if neutralizing remains effective.
View attachment 375174
View attachment 375175
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?