fotokemika fog!@#$%

toddstew · Apr 24, 2006

Hey all,
I originally put this in the darkroom section, but realized the error in my ways, so I'm posting it here:
I just bought some fotokemika vc fb paper from freestyle. I use a red safelight anyway, so when I read the disclaimer in their product information, I wasn't worried. But, when I printed the other night , every print looked extremely flat, like it was flashed or something. In the paper box, it says to use a brown safelight. Anybody have any experience with this paper?
Thanks
Todd

htmlguru4242 · Apr 24, 2006

Did you do a safelight test to see if you were indeed getting fog?

dancqu · Apr 24, 2006

toddstew said:
I just bought some fotokemika vc fb paper
from freestyle. I use a red safelight anyway, ... Todd

Brown, amber. Usual VC paper safelights.
Red is safer still. But there are red safelights and then
there are RED safelights. Dan

toddstew · Apr 24, 2006

I just got some pf 130 dev. so I'm gonna print again hopefully this weekend and do a fog test. Maybe my red light isn't RED enough. Just wondering if anybody else has had this problem with this paper. I'll let you know what happens.
Thanks
Todd

john_s · Apr 24, 2006

I remember reading once a post by Paul Butzi that he found a particular Forte paper very sensitive to a safelight that was ok with all other papers. The classic safelight test as described on the Kodak website is worth doing, or at least the basic test.

I made a red LED safelight that still fogged even Ilford MG. A sheet of Rubylith (from an art shop) fixed it completely.

toddstew · Apr 24, 2006

I just did a quick paper test; I put a piece in the easel with something on it(a neg carrier), with the safe lights on, and left it for a minute. After developing it, no silhouette. Could this paper be sensitive to dichroic filtration as opposed to ilford filters? Sounds silly, but that's the only other factor I can think of. Thoughts?
Todd

Donald Miller · Apr 24, 2006

toddstew said:
I just did a quick paper test; I put a piece in the easel with something on it(a neg carrier), with the safe lights on, and left it for a minute. After developing it, no silhouette. Could this paper be sensitive to dichroic filtration as opposed to ilford filters? Sounds silly, but that's the only other factor I can think of. Thoughts?
Todd

Did you subject the paper to a threshold exposure before you conducted your test? If you didn't your test really wasn't very valid.

toddstew · Apr 25, 2006

I didn't. So, I'm back to spuare one. Thanks for reminding me.
Todd

dancqu · Apr 25, 2006

toddstew said:
So, I'm back to spuare one.

While you're at square one be sure it isn't
developer fog. The fog is gray and includes
the border? Dan

Amund · Apr 25, 2006

Do a print in complete darkness. I have a box of Polywarmtone that don`t like my safelight, and I almost threw away the paper because of lowcontrast prints. Then I tried a print with the safelight off,and now I love that paper

Mark Layne · Apr 25, 2006

I use the Jand C version of this paper regularly with 4 different safelights on at any given time - no problems.
Very nice in Ilford Cooltone developer by the way
Mark

Lachlan Young · Apr 25, 2006

A quick warning - the paper needs at least three or more minutes in the developer - otherwise it looks like a piece of mushy c**p - also, the RC version of this paper seems both faster and contrastier than the FB version.

Hope this helps,

Lachlan

Photo Engineer · Apr 25, 2006

Lachlan Young said:
A quick warning - the paper needs at least three or more minutes in the developer - otherwise it looks like a piece of mushy c**p - also, the RC version of this paper seems both faster and contrastier than the FB version.

Hope this helps,

Lachlan

In my experience, it is sometimes true that you see this type of effect when you try to coat the same formula on two different paper supports (FB and RC).

The RC does not absorb some chemicals used to adjust contrast, but the FB does thereby giving the same emulsion formula different contrasts on different suports. The same is true of development. One paper does not develop as rapidly as another. Again this can lead to different contrasts.

I am seeing this with my own coating experiments on plain paper, FB and RC. Of course, I expected this from prior experience.

This type of effect can also come about from after hardening, in which hardening continues after coating, and the increased hardening lowers contrast. Fog will eventually come up and then the coating is useless. This effect is enhanced by poor keeping.

There are so many possible reasons for this.

PE

toddstew · Apr 25, 2006

Freestyle suggested what was suggested here; to make a print without any safelights on, then go from there. I have two red safe lights and I think if the paper still fogs in the part not covered by the easel, maybe I'll put some rebylith around the safelights. I'll keep you posted if I make any discoveries.
Todd

toddstew · Apr 27, 2006

I just made a print with no safelights on and the print looks fine. I guess my red safelights weren't RED enough.
Todd

dancqu · Apr 27, 2006

toddstew said:
I just made a print with no safelights on and
the print looks fine. I guess my red safelights
weren't RED enough. Todd

My two Yankees have their reddish filters installed.
The one for sink and enlarger area lighting has a 15
watt bulb and the one over the developer and quite
close has a 7.5 watt bulb.

Reddish filters because I cannot find any 5 x 7 FB
Graded paper. I've decided I don't like the way RC
handles so for proofing and testing using a ready
cut 5 x 7 I'll have to change filters.

Graded papers allow for a much higher level of
lighting as they are insensitive to green. Usually
I've yellow and orangish yellow filters installed.

The usual OC or similar filters with correct wattage
bulbs may serve you well. For most purposes print
paper really need not be exposed much to
the safelights. Dan

fotokemika fog!@#$%

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency