Fast graded RC paper for 8x10 negatives

So, I just got an 8x10 view camera for my intro into LF photography (go big or go home right?). It's 93 years old, and getting into tip-top shape will be a work in progress for a long time. I'm going to have lots and lots of questions for the folks in the LF sub-forum as time goes on.

Right now, I'm just looking at how best to capture images so I can start playing with it. I have a 5x7 reducing back, but since it is missing ground glass, I'm stuck with 8x10 negatives for the time being. At $5Cnd a sheet, plus processing, I'm a little afraid of learning on that. Since I'll be doing all contact printing, I really like the idea of RC paper negatives; cheap, fast easy tray development, sign me up. The obvious downside is the incredibly low speed (four stops less than ISO 100 film? Eek!)

So here's my question, what the fastest graded RC paper (bonus points for cheap and easy to aquire). I've just finished burning through a box of Adorama's house brand MG paper in my dark room, and it is definitely faster than Ilford MG RC. But they don't have a graded version that I can see on the webpage.

Kentmere has "Kenthene" which is graded and advertised as "A significantly deeper, richer black can be achieved compared with many alternatives and in a fraction of the time, due to its high speed sensitive emulsion." http://www.kentmere.co.uk/products/product.asp?n=69&t=Kentmere+Photo+Papers
Right now I think I'm going to try and order a box of Grade 1 Kenthene.

What I would really like to know is: Has anyone here used Kenthene? Especially has anyone used it for paper negatives, and if so, what speed did you rate it?

What other options exist? I see a lot of people use Ilford RC for paper negatives; everyone rates it at ISO 6 (except PE who somehow gets ISO 25 out of his?)

Lastly, I should point out that I use Kodak Polymax T as my paper developer. I use it because it is inexpensive, easy to work with, and easy to acquire through my local camera store. I'm really ignorant when it comes to paper developers, so let me know if this is not ideal.

Matt- If you're looking to save some money, you can still use your 5x7 back, even without GG. Use a grease pencil to mark for 5x7, on your 8x10 GG. Then, switch backs to expose. Not ideal, I know, but doable. I'm assuming you have 5x7 holders.

Dear MattKrull

I use KENTMERE Variable Contrast, with a MG filter held over the lens in an adapted MMULTIGRADE below lens kit ( usually grade 3 ) iso6
( plus a bit for the filter ) experiment and enjoy.

Simon ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology Limited

You could consider using 8x10 x-ray film. Can be less expensive than paper negatives, although it comes with its own peculiarities.

Wow!Given the normal subjects for large cameras you could get by with paper at EI 25 and never need a film sheet

Are you sure about his getting EI 25?

pentaxuser

For the missing GG, have a piece of glass cut to fit the back and spray with Krylon glass frost. Don't try to spray the coating all at once, several misting coats works best.

Nun

Methinks you are looking for a Nun for a hot date for Saturday night. I don't believe it works that way. Remember -- it was that easy it would not be worth doing. Why do an oil painting of Paris when you can go thunk with a modern camera? Be glad that using an 8x10 is a giant hassle.

Eddie: Alas, I dont think that will work with my camera (Kodak 2D). I haven't measured, but the 5x7 back looks to be a different depth than the 8x10. However, Rick (Thank you) and others (via PM) have shared with me how to make my own GG. All my film backs are wood, and I'm not yet confident any of them are still good. I've seen a couple of lots of Fidelity 5x7 holders on the big auction site going for a price I can afford, so I may pick some of those up in the near future, we'll see. (I have yet t osee 8x10 holders I can afford, so I really hope I can get the ones I have workign nicely).

Simon: Thanks for the feedback. I just found out my local camera chain cannot (will not?) order any graded RC paper. I'm interested in why you chose grade 3? Everyone else I've read suggests as low a contrast as possible. Certainly with VC it'll be easy to play around and find what I like best.

Adelorenzo: Right now, I'm actually really enamoured with the idea of working with paper negatives. They appeal to me, so while I've heard of x-ray film, and lookied into Lith film, I think I'll start with paper negatives and grow from there.

Pentaxuser: (there was a url link here which no longer exists) There's a rather long discussion on it. My eyes may have crossed before reaching the end of it. I'm not 100% confident he is getting true ISO25, but he's getting the results he wants when he rates it at ISO25.

My subjects are mostly portraits, and maybe a bit of cityscape stuff (ideally at night). My primary lighting system is speedlights, so there will be a lot of learning to get it all to work the way I want. Ideally I'd have ISO 25 paper for an easier time with my flashes. One nice thing with ISO 6 is that my lack of PC port won't affect anything; I can just use a lens cap + remote trigger without fear of ghosting.

Snapguy: I think you misunderstand my intentions. I use the word easy a lot, that's true. I'm not looking for the work to be done for me (what do you mean there is no TTL for 8x10?! ), I'm looking to ease my learning process. If I use paper negatives and contact printing, I am using skills and equipment I am already comfortable with, letting me focus my mental effort on other things. If I can get a paper negative that I can rate at ISO12 or 25, that's one or two less stops of light I need to find, allowing my brain on working the camera movements, composing, dealing with my subject, etc. As I learn those things and they take less mental energy, I can push and learn more things. Baby steps.

GG is a pretty easy DIY. Rick A's solution is quick & easy though.
RE: the difference in thickness of the backs isn't the important part.
What's called the "T" distance is and is an ISO standard.

T distance is measured from the front of the GG frame to the GG itself. All films use the same spec until you get over 8X10

Another vote for the 8x10 X-ray films, at least at some point. The prices are very reasonable, and I've seen shots from people that got the contrast under control, and they looked great!

momus said:

Another vote for the 8x10 X-ray films, at least at some point. The prices are very reasonable, and I've seen shots from people that got the contrast under control, and they looked great!

Click to expand...

I'm really interested in using Xray film actually. I've done some reading, and what I haven't been able to find yet is a list of (or how to identify) single-sided films. Can anyone recommend a singel sided x-ray film?

Last night I developed my first shots (done on Adorama MG using a grade 3 filter). Depsite the 4 second exposure time, I'm rather pleased. My wife is less so. She doesn't feel the image as terribly flattering, so I'm not allowed to scan it