Fomalux 111

[Jim Noel]

I gave it a brief trial yesterday.
It is very fast for a contact paper - just over 4 stops faster than Azo. The Grade 2 compares with a approximately Grade 3 1/2 Oriental. The blacks are nice and deep although I have not yet measure D-max. It seems to work best with very soft negatives. ANy normal paper developer works well - Dektol, LPD, etc.

 

[c6h6o3]

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.

Is your notebook done? If so, I'd like to drive down to see it.

 

[c6h6o3]

Am I missing something here? My Chinese Amidol turns the prints a gawd awful yellow....

I know. And it ruins the fixer. But I can still judge the highlights fairly well.

Shawn: I once got that black, chunky stuff from Mike Jacobson. Only got it one time. That was great amidol. Definitely not the Chinese stuff.

 

[Shawn Dougherty]

Shawn: I once got that black, chunky stuff from Mike Jacobson. Only got it one time. That was great amidol. Definitely not the Chinese stuff.

Yeah, it was awesome! I think I got mine cheap too, because of how it looked. Wish I could get more...

 

[77seriesiii]

so how are you guys like the 111 paper?

./e

 

[jgjbowen]

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.

Sorry, but my notebook is an edition of one Seriously it wasn't too hard to do, just make a bunch of exposures from a full scale negative, develop one with Zero Kbr, have a normal darkroom session, then at the end continue adding Kbr and develop a sheet of each paper in your arsenal, add more Kbr and repeat. Probably took me about two hours total to get a pretty good selection. As I make up a different developer, I expose a few more sheets of paper and develop them in the new developer to add to the notebook. I do need to get my hands on some Ansco 130. Folks whose opinion I respect tell me they like the look of Azo in Ansco 130.

I've only used Amidol with Azo/Lodima. I've never tried a Foma paper......yet. I've got some Haloid, Velox and Convira that I need to try with amidol, but haven't yet. Something else to add to the notebook.

I'd be willing to bet that Lodima and the Foma silver chloride will disappear on the same day....

 

[jgjbowen]

Is your notebook done? If so, I'd like to drive down to see it.

Jim,

MAS told me I should treat myself and view your prints. Perhaps we can get our calendars together this fall. I'd be happy to share my notebook with you.

The notebook may never be "done." A new developer means adding some additional pages.....

 

[henrysamson]

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 basically did the same thing a couple of years ago with all of the various vintages and grades of Azo I have on hand. I used a 21 step tablet (instead of a negative) and the same exposure and processing for all except the last batch of #2 which I processed for 2 minutes instead of one. I put a number on each box of paper and it matches a number on the print. Not a subtle as using a negative but it lets me get close in exposure when trying a different paper by giving me a relative speed/contrast for each paper plus it was easy to see what boxes were pretty much the same.

It was an attempt to make it easier to use up all the old paper with minimal waste. I need to do this with the Lodima once I standardize my processing (KBr quantity and toning) for it.

 

[Mahler_one]

Why? Are they made by the same company? That would be quite a surprise, at least to me.

 

[jgjbowen]

Why? Are they made by the same company? That would be quite a surprise, at least to me.

Honestly, I haven't a clue. MAS has never stated publically, not has he told me privately where Lodima is produced. It just seems rather odd that after MAS spent 5 years trying to get a silver chloride paper produced, another silver chloride paper arrives within 6 months after Lodimas initial production run. There can't be THAT much demand for silver chloride paper.

 

[Peter Schrager]

I have never had a problem with the chinese amidol...just use an EXTRA tray of water after the fix to let the print mellow out...after the next print is made I transfer to a larger bucket and so forth...my chemical supplier friend gave me a wonderful fine mesh screen that I use to filter the chinese stuff-works like dream but for the life of me I can't figure out the info to post here (sorry bout that!!) where there is a will there is way
Best, Peter

 

[Shawn Dougherty]

First prints on the Fomalux washing now. Tired and going to bed soon but my first thought is - careful with the selenium toner. It seems to change color quite rapidly. More thoughts and scans tomorrow.

 

[Mahler_one]

Thanks so very much Shawn! Did you use Amidol?

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

For those that are subscribers, you can find Shawn's pictures in the gallery. It appears he used amidol for sure. The prints look pretty darned nice!

 

[Mahler_one]

I certainly agree about the images Thomas. Very well done. Which ones are from the Fomalux and Amidol?

 

[Shawn Dougherty]

Sorry, busy today. Will have to post details tonight... (there was a url link here which no longer exists) and (there was a url link here which no longer exists) are the Fomalux 111 in amidol (500ml - 1g of KBr - 5 grams amidol - otherwise MAS version).

Toned in KRST 1:50 for 2 minutes, I usually go around 3 or 4 minutes with other papers.

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

Really nice work, Shawn!

 

[photo8x10]

They looks very good....
What about the paper speed?

I hope to try it early, but I've never received my yet...

Stefano

 

[Mahler_one]

I agree again Thomas...well done Shawn!! Great to see what the paper can "do"...an alternative for Lodima? Shawn, just to be sure again....the Fomalux FB, Grade 2?

 

[c6h6o3]

Really nice work, Shawn!

especially the color...very reminiscent of Lodima in amidol. Hmmm...ya think? Naa, probably not. The speeds are different.

 

[Mahler_one]

I agree about the color....doubt very much if the paper is made by the same people...still and all, one does wonder.

 

[Shawn Dougherty]

Thanks for the kind words, fellows! I decided to approach the session as I normally would - new negatives and see what happens.

Speed: Foma seems to be about "2 paper towels" faster than Lodima. I clip 1 paper towel across the reflector around my clear 75 watt bulb with Lodima. I had to add 2 papper towels to get my exposure times up to around a 15 to 20 second base exposure.

Color: I used 1 gram of KBr in 500ml with 1 extra gram of amidol (Chinese) as compared to the MAS version. Color was warm similar to lodima but not quite the same. I always have a hard time describing colors so I'm not going to...

General behavior: Developed in 1 minute, worked fine with a water bath. SLIGHT curl but flattened out very quickly when wet. Dried fairly flat. I cut 8x10 sheets down to 4x5 using a RotoTrim and the edges were fine. They did not flake at any point.

Contrast: Can't be certain of the grade as I printed new negs but I would GUESSTIMATE it to be somewhere between 2.5 and 3.

Toning: This stuff takes on color FAST with KRST. I usually tone at 1:50 for 3 or 4 minutes. I pulled these prints at two minutes. Next time I will pull slightly earlier or tone at 1:100.

Intangibles: nice long scale, easy to make prints. Dodges retained micro contrast and burns were easy and not hard to cloak - not that they were extensive by any measure. (there was a url link here which no longer exists) was exceptionally easy to print. (there was a url link here which no longer exists) was a rather crazy lighting situation and it was relatively simple to print, just a few large burns and one quick dodge.

Major downside to Fomalux 111 = Only one grade!!!

Of course I'm no scientist, my opinions are based on completely subjective criteria. I like how the prints look, I'd be proud to show them. That's what matters to me. I've received INVALUABLE information here at APUG and simply hope my initial thoughts might be useful to someone else. Of course if I've missed something or anyone has a question I'll do my best to answer.

Shawn

 

[Mahler_one]

Great report Shawn, and I am very grateful for your efforts AND your frank comments. Would you care to venture any preliminary remarks about how the paper compares with Azo and Lodima? By the way, is the Fomalux a single or double weight paper? I found your remarks about the response in the water bath particularly compelling. Is it possible that we do have another Azo type of paper that can serve our needs? I'll order a trial pack from Freestyle. I am sure that shipping will take at least a week, but when I have a chance I'll post some additional follow up. Isn't APUG great?

 

[c6h6o3]

Well I think I'll order some. If their Grade 2 is as contrasty as everyone seems to be saying, let's hope they produce a Grade 3 in the future. That would make it roughly equivalent to my teeny tiny precious supply of Azo Grade 4. And then I'd really break out the champagne.

 

[Shawn Dougherty]

Great report Shawn, and I am very grateful for your efforts AND your frank comments. Would you care to venture any preliminary remarks about how the paper compares with Azo and Lodima? By the way, is the Fomalux a single or double weight paper? I found your remarks about the response in the water bath particularly compelling. Is it possible that we do have another Azo type of paper that can serve our needs? I'll order a trial pack from Freestyle. I am sure that shipping will take at least a week, but when I have a chance I'll post some additional follow up. Isn't APUG great?

Glad I could help!

It's a double weight paper.

I would not venture a comparison... I'm no expert and there are many out there who would be better at such a thing.

I did not try an extreme water bath last night as I have done in the past with Lodima and Azo but I used a short water bath which did just what I needed it to do.

I hope MAS decides to offer a 25 pack of Lodima. I've heard from many photographers who want to try it before committing to 100 sheets. For those printing small as I do 25 sheets of 8x10 can offer quite a bit. And of course I'm too stingy to part with any of my stash =)

Yes, APUG is awesome!

let's hope they produce a Grade 3 in the future. That would make it roughly equivalent to my teeny tiny precious supply of Azo Grade 4. And then I'd really break out the champagne.

For sure, Jim! Grades 2 and 3 from Lodima and a Grade 4 from ANYONE and I would be one happy photographer.