Getting back into printing: paper question

CLee · Dec 30, 2006

Ok, so it's been years (probably 10-15) since I've done any printing. Really feel the need to get back into it. So it turns out things have changed a little. Enlargers are cheap but paper is expensive...my beloved Portriga Rapid is gone! I've been looking around and will probably switch to Galerie. The thing I liked about Portriga was the Chloro color. The thing I never liked was the cream paper base.

I've searched here and seen similar discussions about discontinued paper. But the question I really had is this: Way back when, when I was printing Variable contrast paper was inferior to graded, but now it seems everyone makes a VC paper, and fewer people make graded. Have VC papers improved alot over the years? Does it compare favorably to graded.

I know the real answer is to get some and try for myself, but I'd like to hear some opinions...

firecracker · Dec 30, 2006

I'm young enough to not have known the better days of the use of graded paper, but lately I use some graded paper, and I like it as much as VC paper.

But I think the most important thing is to stick to the paper you can be printing for a long time. I know we cannot be certain about which ones will really last in the market, but that's part of the game.

To me, Fuji products are handy so I use them regualry. Fuji Rembrandt is a FB-based VC (with filters) and grade#2 (without filters) paper, and it is good enough for me to like it. It's somewhere between Ilford neutral tone and Agfa warmtone in terms of quality. Since I like to stick to one type of developer for printing, I use this Fuji paper as a VC paper. There's no any other reason for it. The flexibility that this paper has is nice, and I am just hoping Fuji will continue making it as long as it's possible.

glennfromwy · Dec 30, 2006

Modern VC papers are great to work with. I use mostly Ilford Semi Matte Warmtone Fiber paper. I get some great results and I think it's a beautiful paper. In the hands of a true master printer, I've seen incomparable prints on Ilford fiber papers. The warm tone glossy fiber, when not ferrotyped, has a most beautiful "leather" like finish. Materials have come a long way.

TheFlyingCamera · Dec 30, 2006

I can't speak to graded papers, but I have printed extensively on VC papers, and they are excellent these days. In many ways they're easier to massage a difficult negative with than a graded paper would be. I cut my teeth on printing VC paper, and have felt no need to switch to graded. My current favorite paper is the Bergger VCCB (variable contrast warmtone) fiber paper, because you can push the color and tonality of this paper all over the place, depending on your taste and your chemistry of preference. It can go anywhere from warm olive, near-chocolate with a white base, or rich sepia on the warm end, to inky icy cold, with eggplant overtones on the cold end, depending on if you use a warmtone or cooltone developer, and if you tone it in selenium, gold chloride, or sepia toner. Because of price increases, at one time I swore off the Bergger, and went on a paper-testing spree. I went through Bergger, Foma, Ilford, Kentmere and Kodak. In the end, I came back to Bergger. I have some examples from that testing process in my gallery here -

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

and

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

I hope these examples are helpful.

bill schwab · Dec 30, 2006

Yes, in my opinion VC papers are excellent these days and there are still many fine papers to choose from. It has been several years now since I have used a graded paper. For split filter printing alone I would not choose to go back.

Best of luck... and have fun!

Bill

Ole · Dec 31, 2006

I started with graded, used VC for many years, and have recently "rediscovered" graded.

While VC is exellent, I feel the tonality of graded gives it a slight edge in many cases. So if I can, I prefer to use graded. I've got hold of a batch of Ilfobrom Gallerie, and it's just wonderful. The prints don't really compare with VC prints, the tone curve of the Gallerie is longer and straighter.

RalphLambrecht · Dec 31, 2006

Only people who have used both extensively can compare. I don't belong to that group. However, the people who do, tell me that graded papers still have the edge, while VC papers have improved. I use FB VC papers, because I don't want to make any compromise in image contrast. Sometimes, I fine-tune contrast down to 1/8 of a grade, but often to 1/4 of a grade. Graded papers can't do that easily.

Ole · Dec 31, 2006

RalphLambrecht said:
Sometimes, I fine-tune contrast down to 1/8 of a grade, but often to 1/4 of a grade. Graded papers can't do that easily.

I disagree - tuning contrast of graded papers with developer/developing/temperature and other tricks is very easy. I also find graded papers more responsive to "chemical trickery" without losing any quality. A full grade up or down is easy; a quarter grade can be done simply by changing the time in the developer.

RalphLambrecht · Dec 31, 2006

Ole

This is not what I call easy. I don't want to mess with two developers, adjusting times in them or changing temperatures of them. I just want to dial the contrast in. Controlling one variable instead of three. That's what I call easy. Sorry for that.

noseoil · Dec 31, 2006

CL, you might give J&C's poly-warmtone a try. It is a rebranded paper, fiber base, (sold by a sponsor here) with wonderful printing qualities. It is slower than many other papers, but gives a wonderfully rich image. Lately, I've been printing with this paper and a mixed from scratch amidol developer. It works well with dektol, but the amidol gives nice, inky blacks, with great tonal separation. Others here have found the same thing, just a good combination to work with for printing. Give it a try, reasonably priced and very rich look. tim

Dave Miller · Dec 31, 2006

As you say, this is something that you can have the pleasure of discovering for yourself. So welcome to the forum, and enjoy the journey. You will already have seen that the chances of getting a consensus on anything other than the Digital verses Analogue debate is zero, but that just adds to the interest.

Ole · Dec 31, 2006

RalphLambrecht said:
Ole

This is not what I call easy. I don't want to mess with two developers, adjusting times in them or changing temperatures of them. I just want to dial the contrast in. Controlling one variable instead of three. That's what I call easy. Sorry for that.

That's not what I meant either. For a simple quarter grade decrease in contrast, increase exposue about 10% and pull the print from the developer as soon as the development has "stopped". For a quarter grade increase, reduce exposure about 10% and double the developing time.

That's what I call easy. Far easier than changing filtration, and then adjusting exposure to the new filtration.

BBarlow690 · Dec 31, 2006

You might want to read up by downloading the articles from www.circleofthesunproductions.com - they're free.

I routinely use VC and tune the grade to a half or even quarter grade with my VCCE head. The control is wonderful to have. Once printed a portrait and varied by 1/8th paper grade. One print was right, the other wasn't.

That said, Galerie and Azo are both pretty wonderful for the right pictures, too.

CLee · Dec 31, 2006

Wow, thanks for all the responses! Its nice to see this many people still into "analog". Setting a darkroom back up, it's shocking how "old" chemical photography has become.

I never thought there would be a consensus on the VC vs Graded question, but it's interesting how many people feel the papers are of a high quality. I'll have to get my stuff set up and give them a try.

Nice to see you all out there...

Roger Hicks · Dec 31, 2006

CLee said:
Wow, thanks for all the responses! Its nice to see this many people still into "analog". Setting a darkroom back up, it's shocking how "old" chemical photography has become.

I never thought there would be a consensus on the VC vs Graded question, but it's interesting how many people feel the papers are of a high quality. I'll have to get my stuff set up and give them a try.

Nice to see you all out there...

My own belief (and I'm not alone) is that VC caught up some years ago. Yes, it used to be crap. It's not any more.

Remember than in photography, a lot of people see what they want to see...

Cheers,

R.

MurrayMinchin · Dec 31, 2006

Like you CLee, I was 'out of the loop' for about a decade because I didn't buy photography magazines or take my holidays down south in Vancouver. I was happily plunking away on my own, and Galerie was what I used. Then I saw the work of Craig Richards, tracked him down in Banff, and was floored when he told me he used VC paper! Obviously the quality had vastly improved since I'd used VC paper in college a decade earlier because his prints were gorgeous.

I made some prints with Multigrade fb and compared them to the same images done on Galerie. I find them just as nice...but then again..."a lot of people see what they want to see"

Convenience is a huge factor for me. Instead of having to buy 3 or 4 boxes of graded paper I now buy a 50 sheet box of 16x20 and cut the paper to whatever size I need, because all my paper is from one emulsion batch and 50 sheets of 16x20 is cheaper than 2 boxes of 100 sheets of 8x10 anyways.

Murray

MurrayMinchin · Dec 31, 2006

Oh yeah...welcome aboard APUG

Murray

Lee Shively · Dec 31, 2006

Like you, I was a big fan of Portriga Rapid and then stopped doing darkroom work for several years. When I picked up again, I had to learn how to use a whole new group of papers. I was pleasantly surprised to discover the improvements that had taken place in printing papers over the years. I'm even impressed with the quality of RC papers these days (although I'll never forget the gawdawfulness of the original Polycontrast RC).

I settled on variable contrast papers for the economy, first using RC papers and now mostly fiber. After a few years of using VC paper, I really don't miss graded paper that much although graded paper was my preference for twenty-odd years. Nothing really looks like Portriga to me but I've become very fond of Forte Polywarmtone and Ilford Multigrade Warmtone. These days, time is my main darkroom limitation--not the materials available.

Peter Schrager · Dec 31, 2006

Printing

Since I've gone back to graded papers and Amidol with it I'm just flooredd by the simplicity. VC paper IS great and the idea of one box is super but I'm using one box usually and that's grade three. My 120 Acros negs print themselves. I make prints so fast that my head spins some times. I've made almost every negative fit into the grade three paper because I'm finishing a Portfolio and I ONLY have grade three of the Ilfobrom Gallery Matte. It isn't available anymore. I'm trying to sell off my stash of VC papers.
Lo and behold it comes down to WHAT is on the piece of paper and not the paper in the end!! A major artist could use the worst materials and make it sing. ALL of the current products are first class. Do what a previous poster said and stick with a film and dev and do the same for the paper.....
HAPPY NEW YEAR EVERYONE-YOU ARE THE BEST BUNCH OF PEOPLE ON THE INTERNET
Best, Peter

dancqu · Jan 1, 2007

RalphLambrecht said:
I just want to dial the contrast in.

Were that all there was to it. I've a dichro on the
shelf because I found out more is involved. What of
calibration of each paper for exposure times? Another
is the exaggerated claims of 00 to 5+ grades. That
when some who post here find 3 1/2 as far as
some papers can be pushed. I've a curve of a
Forte paper where in the low contrast of less
than dark gray areas starts at grade 3.

Grade differentiation in low density areas likely will
not exceed two or three grades. Tops. And that's
from the manufacturers. Phil Davis will back it up.

But most important and an over riding issue, at
least with me, is the lousy low level of darkroom
lighting allowed by the use of VC papers. Give me
any day that bright yellow/orange-ish lighting
afforded when using Graded papers.

In that gloom, working with a blue and green sensitive
emulsion, I'm sure fine prints can be produced. For
some with good control over their process a no
filter needed grade 2 VC or a Graded 2 paper
is all that is needed. Dan

RalphLambrecht · Jan 1, 2007

Ole said:
That's not what I meant either. For a simple quarter grade decrease in contrast, increase exposue about 10% and pull the print from the developer as soon as the development has "stopped". For a quarter grade increase, reduce exposure about 10% and double the developing time.

That's what I call easy. Far easier than changing filtration, and then adjusting exposure to the new filtration.

Another important aspect for me is the ability to change the contrast within a sheet? Split-Grade Printing only works with VC papers. I wouldn't want to give that up and use it with every other print now.

schlger · Jan 1, 2007

Ole said:
That's not what I meant either. For a simple quarter grade decrease in contrast, increase exposue about 10% and pull the print from the developer as soon as the development has "stopped". For a quarter grade increase, reduce exposure about 10% and double the developing time.

That's what I call easy. Far easier than changing filtration, and then adjusting exposure to the new filtration.

Dear Ole,

VC papers have become better in the last years, but still they waist their contrast in the shadows and show too less contrast in the midtones.
Three days ago, I compared a PMK Negativ on Kentmere Fineprint FB and Kentmere Bromide 2 and as I expected,the rendition of midtones was much more pleasant on Bromide because it separated adjacent densities much better. in the same time, the overall contrast of both prints was aproximately equal. That apearance of greyish overcast on midtones, so often experienced with the different sorts of VC papers was blown away. So it is time to come back to graded paper.
Could you please explain your technique of altering the contrast by developers? We have to change the contrast at least by half a grade up and down or one full grade down to leave no gap between two grades.

Thanks
Gerhard

Dave Miller · Jan 1, 2007

Im always concerned when I see misleading statements made on this forum least they be taken as fact by others. I feel elements of Dans posting above are very misleading.
One of the things that surprised me when attending a workshop in Les McLean's darkroom a year or so back was the high level of safe lighting that he employed, two overhead 10x8 Ilford 902 units; bright enough to easily read by. Afterwards I increased the level in my own darkroom to a similar level, this tests safe for more than 20 minutes with Ilford and Kentmere VC papers. So light levels should not be an overriding issue, for it isnt.
Further I have no doubt that there are some papers that cant be pushed further than grade 31/2, but I have yet to find them.
My experience is that the advantages of VC papers far out way those of graded papers, however it is a matter of individual choice and preference as to which type, or make is used to achieve the required results. The need to only stock paper by size and finish, rather than by size, finish, and grade is a tremendous advantage to many.

Jim Chinn · Jan 1, 2007

It really does come down to personal prefrences. I think one can over work a negative with all the possibilities of VC paper. At a Les McClean workshop I saw a variety of simple techniques to coax subtle changes in contrast on a graded paper.

I think it really comes down to deciding which paper has a paper base, Dmax and ability to work with post exposure techniques (toning, bleaching etc) that best suits your negatives as opposed to the choice of graded vs VC.

RalphLambrecht · Jan 1, 2007

Dave Miller said:
...
My experience is that the advantages of VC papers far out way those of graded papers, however it is a matter of individual choice and preference as to which type, or make is used to achieve the required results. The need to only stock paper by size and finish, rather than by size, finish, and grade is a tremendous advantage to many.
...

I agree with that, but the biggest benefit to me is the fact that I can get any grade within a single sheet to do split-grade printing, or simpy use a different contrast for the sky then the foreground.

Having said that, I'm not sure that there isn't a quality benefit to graded papers. Someone mentioned the 'midtone veil', which I can easily see in RC vs FB prints. Nevertheless, the contrast restrictions of graded papers are a hurdle for me. Ole claimed to being able to overcome this with exposure and development manipulations. I did a test to verify this claim (unfortunately only with MGIV FB, which is RC, but at a constant filtration), so the results would have to be redone with a graded paper.

Well here are the results anyway:

dev time [min] ISO Grade

1.0 <0.0 (warning Dmax not reached)
1.5 1.7
2.0 2.0
2.5 2.1
3.0 2.3
4.0 2.4
5.0 2.5
6.0 2.6

So, there is roughly a grade or (+/- 1/2 grade) between 1.5 and 6 minutes of development time. Ole's proposal should work.

But what about split-grade printing? Is the quality difference of graded papers worth to give it up?

Getting back into printing: paper question

CLee

firecracker

glennfromwy

TheFlyingCamera

Membership Council

bill schwab

Advertiser

Ole

Moderator

RalphLambrecht

Ole

Moderator

RalphLambrecht

noseoil

Dave Miller

Ole

Moderator

BBarlow690

CLee

Roger Hicks

MurrayMinchin

Membership Council

MurrayMinchin

Membership Council

Lee Shively

Peter Schrager

dancqu

RalphLambrecht

schlger

Dave Miller

Jim Chinn

RalphLambrecht

Getting back into printing: paper question

Membership Council

Advertiser

Moderator

Moderator

Moderator

Membership Council

Membership Council

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency