Fomalux 111

[c6h6o3]

Hope that works for you! I'm using a 100, 150 and 200 depending on the negs. All my newer work prints with the 150 at between 20 to 40 seconds.




I'm not sure where you're coming from here. I use highly dilute Rodinal with great results. Michael and Paula thought I had no reason to change back to pyro. I also watched Michael make a gorgeous print of a fellow student's negative developed in D76.

I should have said: "I" need a staining developer with Lodima. After seeing Michael Smith's Chicago work, I'm going back to ABC pyro.

 

[Mahler_one]

I agree Shawn....there is NO compelling reason to use a staining developer to develop negatives to use with the Lodima paper. Having agreed with you, if one is DBI, then a staining developer-by virtue of the fact that the stain "desensitizes" the film a bit to light, might be better to use. Certainly Pyrocat HD in trays is very inexpensive to use, especially of one makes the two parts oneself. Using BTZS calibrations, and using the Jobo expert tanks, I too have had no problem making negatives that print well on Lodima. The negatives are certainly NOT as dense as those made by Michael and Paula; but then again, the film doesn't have nearly the base plus fog that the aging Plus X film that they use so well. Thanks.

 

[c6h6o3]

The negatives are certainly NOT as dense as those made by Michael and Paula; but then again, the film doesn't have nearly the base plus fog that the aging Plus X film that they use so well. Thanks.

You might be surprised. Michael Smith has been making much thinner negatives than before he photographed in Chicago. The prints from these negatives are the best he's ever made, even though some of them have base fog of density 0.5. I was utterly stunned by these prints. BTW, he uses Super XX Pan, not Plus-X.

 

[Mahler_one]

Yes, I was mistaken about the film and I sincerely thank you for correcting me. I agree about the Chicago prints.

It's hard to fathom how Michael can judge his negatives so well through the base plus fog that you allude to. He is simply very skilled and knowledgeable about his materials. If one has not had the opportunity to see his prints ( and those of Paula ) at a workshop or elsewhere, then one is missing an interesting and illuminating experience.

 

[photo8x10]

I agree Shawn and Mahler_one about stain developer, I have some negatives developed in D-76 print well on Lodima or Azo paper, I got extra density for example when I used D-76 my normal developing time was as a N+1 time to understand more and less the density I use.
Not all my negatives as so dense and thin negative are sometimes easily to print with great result.

 

[Mahler_one]

Agreed....one need only go to a plus development situation to add the needed density-if desired-on a negative to be used for printing on Lodima paper. We are all aware of the continuing arguments both "for and against" staining developers. Not opening that can of worms again here!

Agree also about the thinner negatives. Assuming the exposure of the shadows is adequate, then one need only use a less powerful bulb.

Ed

 

[henrysamson]

Interesting. I've been loading up my amidol with extra KBr in order to warm up Lodima. I've found it is one of the most lovely colors I've been able to achieve with any paper. Maybe it will have the same effect on this Foma.... my somewhat limited experience with Azo has show it does no warm up much with the same formula... of course my Azo is vintage so that might have something to do with it. Thanks, Trevor.

I made my first prints from the production Lodima last week using 3 ml/liter of KBr and the color is not warm enough. That is what I used for Azo and was very pleased with the results. It also worked for the test run of Lodima from a couple of years ago. The new Lodima prints looked a little "off" and when I held them up to some Azo prints of mine (and some M&P Azo prints I have) the difference was obvious.

I need to run some tests with increasing amounts of KBr to see what works. How much have you had to use to get the color you like?

Thanks!

 

[Mahler_one]

Thanks Henry. I have used the Amidol formula that Michael and Paula included with the Lodima paper. I have little experience ( aside from a few sheets ) of working with the older Azo paper. The color of the Lodima prints seems perfect to me. Then again, lacking your experience precludes my making any in-depth evaluations.

 

[Shawn Dougherty]

I made my first prints from the production Lodima last week using 3 ml/liter of KBr and the color is not warm enough. That is what I used for Azo and was very pleased with the results. It also worked for the test run of Lodima from a couple of years ago. The new Lodima prints looked a little "off" and when I held them up to some Azo prints of mine (and some M&P Azo prints I have) the difference was obvious.

I need to run some tests with increasing amounts of KBr to see what works. How much have you had to use to get the color you like?

Thanks!

I don't mix up a 10% solution, I just crush up the KBr and add it right to the amildol. I use about 2 grams in 500ml (I've been printing mostly 4x5's lately). This is a significant increase... I also use 5 grams of amidol in 500ml, this was originally intended to make up for what I felt was lost in filtering the Chinese amidol through a coffee filter but might also be compensating for the extra KBr.... I don't know the science, just what looks good to me. =)

All the best. Shawn

 

[henrysamson]

I don't mix up a 10% solution, I just crush up the KBr and add it right to the amildol. I use about 2 grams in 500ml (I've been printing mostly 4x5's lately). This is a significant increase... I also use 5 grams of amidol in 500ml, this was originally intended to make up for what I felt was lost in filtering the Chinese amidol through a coffee filter but might also be compensating for the extra KBr.... I don't know the science, just what looks good to me. =)

All the best. Shawn

Yikes! That's about 13 times what I use. I plan to pick a negative and make several prints (all exposed the same) and increase the KBr in the tray by 1 ml for each print and then compare them after they are toned and dried. But your comments regarding the color intrigue me. So for a last print I may increase it to what you are using just to see the result. Do you end up with a very warm print?

I bought a "lifetime supply" of the Chinese amidol and also filter it through a coffee filter. I don't increase the amount because I assume what is left on the filter is some sort of impurity. Since it does not dissolve it is not a factor in developing (just staining!). But, the amount left in the filter is included when I weigh the stuff and it is not amidol so perhaps my logic is flawed.

 

[Shawn Dougherty]

As I mentioned it's been suggested to me that I might be making up for the extra KBr by increasing the amidol. I have no idea. I just like the way the prints look. The color is warm and I tone in selenium at 1:50 for about 3 minutes.

I think your experiment sounds like a great idea. Good luck!

Shawn

 

[Jim Noel]

It is now available from Freestyle, and yes, it is a true silver chloride paper.

 

[c6h6o3]

I made my first prints from the production Lodima last week using 3 ml/liter of KBr and the color is not warm enough.

Well that's somewhat distressing. Did you buy one of the test boxes when they were selling those? My experience parallels Shawn's. That test run yielded the most beautiful print color ever in amidol. The only prints I've seen on the production Lodima were ones made by Michael Smith and the color was perhaps not quite as warm as what I'd gotten with the test stuff, but still very nice. I'm fairly certain I could warm it up a little with a bit more KBr.

 

[henrysamson]

Did you buy one of the test boxes when they were selling those?

Yes, I have printed on the test run paper. I liked it although the color was not the same as Azo the difference was only noticeable to me if I held the prints side by side. No where near as noticeable as what I see with the production Lodima. I also processed it just like Azo. I hope to head back out into the darkroom this weekend and will try again.

I love the paper weight of the new Lodima. It is thicker than single weight but not as thick as most double weight papers. Hard to damage when wet but easy to trim and dry mount.

 

[c6h6o3]

I use about 2 grams in 500ml (I've been printing mostly 4x5's lately). This is a significant increase...

Quite an understatement. Using MAS's formula, you would be adding 0.15 grams (1.5ml of a 10% solution) to your 500ml of working solution. Your recipe is equivalent to adding 40ml of 10% KBr to the MAS 1 liter working solution of amidol.

 

[Mahler_one]

Henry: Hearing about the "problems" with the Chinese Amidol suggested that purchasing the Amidol from Art Craft would make life much easier. I can tell you that the Amidol from Art Craft is absolutely a joy to work with. Goes easily into solution, very little "dirt and grime" left in the developing tray, no need to filter, etc., etc. Life is difficult enough without having to filter Amidol! One might conceivably save a few bucks with the Chinese Amidol, but is the savings worth the worry, time, and hassles?

Ed

 

[Shawn Dougherty]

Quite an understatement. Using MAS's formula, you would be adding 0.15 grams (1.5ml of a 10% solution) to your 500ml of working solution. Your recipe is equivalent to adding 40ml of 10% KBr to the MAS 1 liter working solution of amidol.

I know, you pointed this out to me in another thread. =) Might be that I'm making up for the restrainer by adding an extra gram of amidol per 500ml... I use about 3 grams of KBr if I mix 1L of solution. That said I get jet blacks in 1 minute, developer still works the next day when covered with saran wrap and the paper is just a gorgeous warm color...

Lodima seems most flexible. That Ilya cat is always posting unusual yet lovely colored Lodima scans. I wonder what he's doing to achieve them? Toners?

 

[c6h6o3]

Life is difficult enough without having to filter Amidol! One might conceivably save a few bucks with the Chinese Amidol, but is the savings worth the worry, time, and hassles?

It certainly is nasty stuff to work with, but the Chinese amidol seems to render a blacker black. Subjective judgment, I know, but it seems that way to me. I don't print with it very much as I still have a pound or so of Artcraft, but I'm not sure that the price is the only advantage to the Chinese stuff.

Maybe I'll give your recipe a try, Shawn, as there's nothing cheaper than KBr.

 

[henrysamson]

Henry: Hearing about the "problems" with the Chinese Amidol suggested that purchasing the Amidol from Art Craft would make life much easier. I can tell you that the Amidol from Art Craft is absolutely a joy to work with. Goes easily into solution, very little "dirt and grime" left in the developing tray, no need to filter, etc., etc. Life is difficult enough without having to filter Amidol! One might conceivably save a few bucks with the Chinese Amidol, but is the savings worth the worry, time, and hassles?

Ed

Other than having to filter it I don't know of any problems. It dissolves almost instantly (except for the solids that get filtered out) and produces incredible prints. I got 10 kg with the initial order and have bought more from individuals since then. I think I am at the point where I won't need to buy anymore amidol for a very long time.

 

[jgjbowen]

I plan to pick a negative and make several prints (all exposed the same) and increase the KBr in the tray by 1 ml for each print and then compare them after they are toned and dried.

Henry,

I've done this. I'd recommend you start with ZERO Kbr in the amidol. You'll get one of the coldest untoned prints you'll ever see. From there I added Kbr in 2ml (10% solution) increments until I got to something like 10 or 12ml/ltr of amidol. I did this with Rochester Grade 2, Canadian Grade 2 and Canadian Grade 3 Azo. I'll have to look to see if I did this with Lodima at the same time. What I experienced was a warming of tone. I want to warn you that Kbr is a restrainer and as the amount got much above 6ml/ltr the prints needed additional exposure to compensate for the added restrainer in the developer.

I have so much Azo/Lodima I've decided to put together a notebook. The notebook contains images all made from the same negative but using different emulsions of Azo/Lodimia paper in different developers. Early on I noticed how much different Azo looked when developed in Dektol, Amidol or Neutol WA. I figure some day I'll have an image that just screams for a particular tone. I expect the notebook to help me decide just what combination of paper/developer will fill that need.

I'd encourage you to complete the work with the various amount of Kbr, you'll learn a lot.

Good Luck Henry,

John

 

[jgjbowen]

Other than having to filter it I don't know of any problems. It dissolves almost instantly (except for the solids that get filtered out) and produces incredible prints. I got 10 kg with the initial order and have bought more from individuals since then. I think I am at the point where I won't need to buy anymore amidol for a very long time.

Am I missing something here? My Chinese Amidol turns the prints a gawd awful yellow. It takes about 5-10 minutes for it to wash out, but in the meantime I have a hard time judging the highlights of the print. I've switched back to Artcraft Amidol and only keep the Chinese stuff around in case the world stops producing Amidol all together. Life is too short to spend 5-10 minutes/print waiting for the yellow stain to disappear so I can properly judge the prints highlights. Henry, do you experience this yellowing with your Chinese Amidol? How about the rest of you?

Thanks,
John

 

[Shawn Dougherty]

My Chinese Amidol turns the prints a gawd awful yellow. It takes about 5-10 minutes for it to wash out, but in the meantime I have a hard time judging the highlights of the print. How about the rest of you?

Thanks,
John

Same here. I can live with the other problems but rinsing until I can properly judge the highlights is a real problem for me.

Maybe 3 years ago I ordered Amidol from PF. I got a chunky black version that had to be filtered - BUT - it did NOT turn the prints yellow like that.... I thought THAT was Chinese amidol which is why I recently bought a pound - and discovered the yellow stain....

 

[Mahler_one]

Amen John!

John, what a fabulous idea....a notebook that provides guidance as to the amount of KBR, or the "correct developer", so that you can render the tone of the print according to your wishes. Such notebook might be something others using Lodima would consider buying....!

John-quick question. Have you used Amidol with the Fomalux, or another paper ( for example, EMaks ), when contact printing? One might be excused for wondering if Lodima will "always" be available and it would be nice to have a ready alternative-heaven forbid.

 

[mcfactor]

Have any of you guys tried ansco 130? And, if so, how do you find the color compared to amidol? I just got the new fomalux in the mail, I'll be able to do some tests this weekend, with ansco 130 (since that is all I have), so I guess I'll answer my own question to a certain degree.

 

[Shawn Dougherty]

I love 130 with enlarging papers but have found that (at 1:1) it produces cooler results than amidol (loaded with KBr or with the MAS version). Which seems strange to me because it produces somewhat warm tones for me with Kentona, Emaks and of course MG Warmtone...

I no longer use 130 with silver chloride as I've found the water bath with amidol to be invaluable.

I received my Fomalux 111 yesterday and should be printing with it tonight. Will post results here and scans in the gallery tomorrow.