Fixed grade paper – benefits over MG?

[Kasper Pihl]

Hello there

I am curious about fixed grade papers – they are still available (at least i two –or maybe three– grades), but I can't seem to find information about why one would want to use the instead of multigrade papers?

Do they have qualities that MG papers can't match?

Cheers,
Kasper

 

[MattKing]

When variable contrast papers were originally introduced they weren't nearly as good as the better existing fixed grade papers.
Current variable contrast papers are far, far better than the original versions.
In the meantime, the selection of fixed grade papers has shrunk to almost nil.
The remaining fixed grade papers are good quality and have their own character. You might like them, but I would suggest that many of the best fixed grade papers are gone.
The reason that a few remain is that there still are a few photographers whose workflow is based on them, and therefore buy them.
They do tend to encourage extra care in film choice, exposure and development.

 

[Nicholas Lindan]

Fixed grade paper combined with the desire to always print on #2 paper was the impetus for the Zone System - rather than control contrast with the paper the contrast was controlled by changes to film exposure and development.

Nevertheless, the range of paper contrast available in the 60's was enormous.

Along with the disappearance of graded papers is the disappearance of paper textures and tones. My 1968 Kodak Darkroom Dataguide listed 25 papers from AD-Type (no idea what that was) to Velox Unicontrast (again - "Unicontrast"???) with these papers available in 9 surface finishes. In this matrix there were 64 different combinations available, not counting the contrast grades: some were single grade, some polycontrast, and some available in grades 0-5. The paper bases were available in Cream White, White, Snow White and Old Ivory. Weights were Single Weight, Double Weight, Light Weight and Medium Weight. The image color varied from cold tone to almost sepia. And that's just from Kodak.

Back then the graded papers were single emulsions and had very smooth HD curve while the polycontrast papers of the day were roller coaster rides. It is only recently with Ilford's MGV papers that properly well behaved polycontrast paper has become available.

Looking at the HD curves of current fixed-grade papers you can see the characteristic bumps of a two emulsion polycontrast paper. The only difference is there is no color sensitizer in the emulsion and so the contrast was only variable when the paper was made. When you get the paper the contrast is locked in place. I don't see much advantage to that.

In summary - Q: Benefits of fixed grade paper? A: None (that I can see). As always, YMMV.

 

[ic-racer]

why one would want to use the instead of multigrade papers?

Many enlargers and contact light sources are unable to print on multicontrast paper in more than a single grade.

 

[Kasper Pihl]

Thank you both very much for your insightful answers. It was as I suspected – I think I just hoped a little, that there were some special property that made using tese fixed papers worthwhile

They do tend to encourage extra care in film choice, exposure and development.

I can imagine!! Especially with only to grades…

Fixed grade paper combined with the desire to always print on #2 paper was the impetus for the Zone System - rather than control contrast with the paper the contrast was controlled by changes to film exposure and development..

That is a quite interesting point. It does make a lot of sense!

Cheers,
Kasper

 

[Vaughn]

Papers have a variety of charcateristics. Native contrast, color, surface, 'feel', and so forth. Some papers react to toners differently. One of the reasons I drifted towards alt processes is for better control of the material -- especially after Portriga Rapid underwent drastic changes before totally disappearing.

 

[pentaxuser]

Many enlargers and contact light sources are unable to print on multicontrast paper in more than a single grade.

Can you elaborate on this, thanks? It sounds as if enlargers cannot take advantage of MG paper's ability to deliver grades including half grades from 00 to 5. I thought that both colour heads with Y and M and non colour heads with the likes of Ilford MG filters are able to deliver multigrades

Are there specific enlargers and contact light sources that do not work this way and if so which ones are they?
Thanks

pentaxuser

 

[Paul Howell]

The older cold heads that used florescent tubes did not print VC well, the newer models may have over come the limitations of florescent tubes. When graded papers were available from grade 1 to 6 (some brands topped at 4 others all the way to 6) you could print softer or harder then with VC. I have a few packets of graded FB, grade 3 which is all I can find, likely will replace with VC FB.

 

[BMbikerider]

Many enlargers and contact light sources are unable to print on multicontrast paper in more than a single grade.

Really? Which enlargers are you talking about ?

 

[BMbikerider]

The only advantage that I can think of with single grade paper is they have a higher silver content in the emulsion which can produce better gradations in the blacks, but they tend to be more expensive,. However the latest Ilford MG5 is about as good as it gets at a reasonable price.

 

[pentaxuser]

When graded papers were available from grade 1 to 6 (some brands topped at 4 others all the way to 6) you could print softer or harder then with VC. I have a few packets of graded FB, grade 3 which is all I can find, .

Yes and isn't that the problem i.e. there may have been a period when there were graded papers from 1 to 6 but they have now gone so for al practical purposes the range of graded papers is now very small so any benefits of this once large range have now disappeared.

No doubt ic-racer will elaborate on his quote to cover my questions. I am especially interested in those enlargers and contact print ligth sources that cannot replicate more than one grade. On the surface and for anyone wondering about buying an enlarger this was a worrying statement

pentaxuser

 

[MattKing]

No doubt ic-racer will elaborate on his quote to cover my questions. I am especially interested in those enlargers and contact print ligth sources that cannot replicate more than one grade. On the surface and for anyone wondering about buying an enlarger this was a worrying statement

Paul Howell's post about fluorescent tube based Cold Light enlarger light sources (and contact printers) references the most common source for the problem.
For a while, they were very popular, as they provided a real alternative to the then much more common condenser heads. There aren't a lot of them out there now.
Some of the early attempts to use LED lights also gave unpredictable results with variable contrast papers.
My experiment with replacing the halogen bulb in my LPL 7700 enlarger with an LED replacement resulted in "unusual" contrast behaviors, along with overly long print times.

 

[ic-racer]

Can you elaborate on this, thanks? It sounds as if enlargers cannot take advantage of MG paper's ability to deliver grades including half grades from 00 to 5. I thought that both colour heads with Y and M and non colour heads with the likes of Ilford MG filters are able to deliver multigrades

Are there specific enlargers and contact light sources that do not work this way and if so which ones are they?
Thanks

pentaxuser

Pretty much any 'white light' enlarger or contact printer prints only about #2 grade with MG paper. Coloring the light for multigrade printing can be very challenging on some enlargers.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Not any more, benefit-wise. Nearly all the classic graded papers are long gone; and in the meantime, VC papers have dramatically improved and dominate even the top tier niches. I have two true additive narrow-band RGB colorheads, a conventional CMY colorhead 8X10 enlarger, and an 8X10 enlarger equipped with a high-output Aristo V54 blue-green cold light, plus the option of split printing with any of them using hard blue versus hard green glass filter over the lens. I can achieve nearly identical results with any of the above methods with any current brand of VC paper. No problem at the extremes of very low or very high contrast either, although very very few of my negs are far enough off in proper developed density to need that kind of beating half to death.

Kasper - Zone System officially standardized to Grade 2 paper? Nope, that's nonsense. Certain gurus did try to codify their own particular tweak on it standardized to Gr 2, or bully that opinion into position, but the whole point of the ZS was that it could be highly personalized and matched to your own film development regimen. I ordinarily only kept Grade 3 paper on hand, and many others did the same thing; but grades differed somewhat brand to brand, and the really good papers had enough flexibility in them to leverage them one grade either way, depending on the amount of development.

Now even talking about grades in reference to VC paper usage seems archaic, redundant, and counterproductive. VC allows a full continuum.

 

[john_s]

Paul Howell's post about fluorescent tube based Cold Light enlarger light sources (and contact printers) references the most common source for the problem.
For a while, they were very popular, as they provided a real alternative to the then much more common condenser heads. There aren't a lot of them out there now.
Some of the early attempts to use LED lights also gave unpredictable results with variable contrast papers.
My experiment with replacing the halogen bulb in my LPL 7700 enlarger with an LED replacement resulted in "unusual" contrast behaviors, along with overly long print times.

I have two Cold Light heads from the 1970s, one 4x5 and one for a 2x3 Beseler. And a spare tube for each. They are not good with VC papers because the light is more blue than anything else. One could become an expert in tailoring negatives to print on the small contrast range possible with such light sources (using below the lens filters) but why not enjoy the flexibility of VC paper?
The company that took over Aristo makes (or at least did until fairly recently) a wider spectrum replacement tube for these single-tube heads.
If anyone would like to make me an offer for the old heads please do so!

 

[Nicholas Lindan]

Pretty much any 'white light' enlarger or contact printer prints only about #2 grade with MG paper. Coloring the light for multigrade printing can be very challenging on some enlargers.

Not that I love getting overly pedantic or anything...

If it is really "white light" then it is, by definition, eminently filterable to any color spectrum you wish.

I think the conundrum lies in fluorescent and LED light sources that are visually white but whose spectrum is a picket fence. Anything that stimulates our eye's red, blue and green receptors appears as white, but this can be accomplished with an infinity of spectrums, none of them "white" in the scientific sense. This is the reason digital color images can look very strange with fluorescent and LED lighting, we see the spectrum as white but the sensor has different RGB spectral sensitivity than our eyes and the pickets in the spectrum fall differently between the three "primary colors."

Incandescent lamps produce white light with a continuous spectrum and are no problem when it comes to filtration to change the color/spectrum.

 

[koraks]

I think the conundrum lies in fluorescent and LED light sources

Not really. Fluorescent may not be a pretty spectrum, but sufficiently continuous for filtering with G & B filters.
LED, if it's R-G-B (uncommon! most white leds are phosphor coated), in the worst case scenario will have a blue component that's not as deep blue as you'd want so you might be only able to get to grade 4-4.5 instead of 5.
All in all, I cannot really think of any enlarger light source that cannot be made to work satisfactorily with multigrade.

 

[ic-racer]

Not that I love getting overly pedantic or anything...

If it is really "white light" then it is, by definition, eminently filterable to any color spectrum you wish..

I was referring to the physical challenges of filtering the light. For example, obtaining a filter and placing it in the light path. Easier written than done in some cases.

 

[ic-racer]

Here is a good example. One is not just going to go out and buy a filter holder for this lens. Then one must obtain the filters of appropriate size. Lamp-house filters are also a possibility, but a set of 12x12" filters is about $480.

 

[Nicholas Lindan]

All in all, I cannot really think of any enlarger light source that cannot be made to work satisfactorily with multigrade.

I can: an old (60's) Aristo cold-light head. It only generated grade 3.5 - 5, maybe. Admittedly, this was the linear HD curve range of the old Ilford Multigrade, so maybe not that much of a loss. The combination worked a treat with very thin negatives. Anything else, not so much unless you liked the old "soot & chalk."

Yes, it was the phosphor emitter white LEDs I was referring to. Although phosphor coated light sources produce a 'continuous' spectrum the interaction of that spectrum with VC filters may produce other than optimum results; conversely that interaction may work perfectly for you.

It's all just a hobby for most of us. The purpose is to enjoy it. Whatever works for you is the right way to do it.

 

[Nicholas Lindan]

Here is a good example. One is not just going to go out and buy a filter holder for this lens. Then one must obtain the filters of appropriate size. Lamp-house filters are also a possibility, but a set of 12x12" filters is about $480.

Er, yes, that can get expensive - but if you can afford the lens and enlarger the $480 should be chump change. It's not really a matter of "it can't be done" as "I don't want to spend the money to do it." For some the barrier might be a used set of filters on ebay for $10.

The OAP* solution, if you find yourself in retirement with an 8x10 Durst in the basement that says "Feed Me!" every time you go down the stairs, might be split-grade printing with a couple of sheets of Roscoe; that will only set you back $13.98 and you get 2 12x12's and a 4 6x6's out of it. It would be nice to work out a set of Roscoe filters that would produce the gamut of single filter VC grades - unfortunately I no longer have access to a spectrophotometer; maybe I should look on ebay, spend $1200 so I can use $6.99 filters, sounds like a wise 'investment' to a man who likes toys.

*OAP for USA: Old Age Pensioner, living on Social Security and your 401K. Hint for the young whipper snappers: you are going to need twice the savings you think you are; as this seems to hold true for whatever amount you manage to squirrel away there is no point worrying about it.

 

[Bill Burk]

I use graded Ilford Galerie paper whenever possible. My most valid reason for using it is that I am indecisive and do not like having too many half grades to choose from.

If it’s thin it gets grade 3 and if it’s high contrast it gets grade 2. Instead of changing grade to get different subject areas to look the print value I want, I dodge and burn to get what I want.

 

[pentaxuser]

So attempting to summarise ic-racer's replies and other contributions( thanks all) I am left unsure if a normal white light bulb such as the likes of an incandescent often found in b&w enlargers is not a suitable light source for getting prints at the range of grades that MG paper and filters are said to provide.

ic-racers, it sounds as if any white light source such as an incandescent bulb cannot produce other than grade 2 but doesn't this mean that all such enlargers using white light bulbs cannot produce other than one grade, namely grade 2?

Can I ask what is the source of this information?


Thanks

pentaxuser

 

[MattKing]

So attempting to summarise ic-racer's replies and other contributions( thanks all) I am left unsure if a normal white light bulb such as the likes of an incandescent often found in b&w enlargers is not a suitable light source for getting prints at the range of grades that MG paper and filters are said to provide.

A formerly "normal" (and now more and more exotic and rare) white light incandescent bulb works fine.
A significant number of enlargers use something else.

 

[Nicholas Lindan]

Condenser enlargers that use the standard PH21x bulb are still common. Enlargers with bastardized Ulbricht sphere diffusers usually use halogen lamps.