Graded paper tryout

[henk@apug]

Hello,

I am going to try out graded FB paper (Ilford Ilfobrom).

This has been discussed before, but here you go :

Is it possible to summarize the advantages of graded paper (versus multigrade) ?

Thanks !

 

[Old-N-Feeble]

I can only comment regarding my personal experiences from 30 years ago. I tried to like multi-grade papers but could never get the tonal values or final print hues I wanted. The color changed depending on the contrast and split-grade printing resulted in prints with odd-looking multiple tones. Also, the multi-grade papers I tried didn't tone very well... or evenly.

I switched to graded paper... tried many brands developed in several types of developers. I finally found Ilford Gallery and a phenidone-based developer (can't remember the brand). I disliked the untoned slight olive drab hue but selenium toner did a beautiful job of producing a subdued plum color. I only used grade 2 or 3... and nearly always 3 unless I accidentally selenium toned a neg a little too much. I also achieved better shadow detail but this also improved as my methods improved. I stuck with this combination for years and never tried multi-grade papers again.

ETA... Summation (just my ancient experience):
Improved tonal values
Consistent color
Better shadow detail
Deeper D-max
Better acceptance of toner

 

[Slixtiesix]

You should have a look on this thread ;-)

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

 

[artonpaper]

I like modern multicontrast papers very much. In the 70s I had a job where we printed on Kodak Polycontrast. I did not really like that paper very much. But multicontrast papers improved in the late 80s and 90s. Now, I'm not sure I see any advantage to graded papers. But there will be subtle differences in print tone, meaning image color. And they may respond differently to toners from what you are used to. I did notice a difference between Ilford Multigrade and Ilford Galleria. The Galleria, a graded paper, had deeper tones and surprisingly prints made on that paper dried flatter. However it was at least ten years ago that I had that experience and I'm sure these papers continue to evolve. I think you are right to try the graded paper, you may see things in it that suit you. But it disappointing when making a print on grade 2 paper and realizing that you need grade 3 and you don't have enough of it.

 

[Old-N-Feeble]

<snip>... it's disappointing when making a print on grade 2 paper and realizing that you need grade 3 and you don't have enough of it.

There's an easy fix for that. Have enough of anything you might need. Or you could just selenium tone the neg for more contrast.

 

[chimneyfinder]

Hi, henk@apug,
Graded papers are very good for consistency and can be versatile with increasing experience . For example, altering exposure time and development time can produce differences in contrast, whilst neutral, warm and soft acting developers and the use of toning can impart a whole variety of 'flavours' to your printing. With dodging and burning and bleaching, the range of tools available is quite often sufficient to make a particular grade work for you. Having said that it would be useful to stock a couple of different grades, with G2 and G3 probably best.
I'm not sure these days if graded papers offer much difference to the look of a print, I have a large range of papers (too many) that are very different from each other, but I would recommend using single grade paper at some point because I think it would add to your understanding and technique and, in some ways it can make printing a more straightforward path by taking the choices within multigrade out of the picture, if you pardon the pun.
In short, it shouldn't be seen as a limitation of your objectives.
Regards, Mark Walker.

 

[George Collier]

My experience (from early 60's on) is consistent with artonpaper, basically, years ago, VC, or MG as they are known today, were just not up to the quality of the best graded papers.
Chimneyfinder makes some points about using graded paper, but I don't see them as advantages, rather techniques that can help.

My opinion on your question, as asked, is that there is no advantage, except:
If you like the look (color, tonal response, response to toning, etc) of a graded paper very much and can't reproduce it with any MG paper, or
Due to your enlarger light source, you have problems using MG papers with their filtration.
As Chimneyfinder points out, graded papers may be more consistent, especially if your light source varies, or if your MG filters fade over time, etc. To me, this isn't a problem, though. I keep very good records of exposure and filter combinations (I do a lot of split filter printing - not possible with graded paper), and if I start to reprint something 2 years after the original, following the "recipe" from the first time, I just adjust to get what I want (I might even change my mind about what I want. . .) I don't see any inconsistencies with printing multiple copies at the same time.

 

[artonpaper]

Just to add a bit, I worked in a lab for 15 years (part time mostly) and we used MG papers. I would frequently have to reprint a negative months after I originally printed it, and the customer would bring my first print in and ask me to match it. I printed far too many negatives to keep notes. I always managed to make a match print or prints. I did notice that Ilford filters tended to fade after a while, Kodak filters were very stable. We also had one enlarger with an Ilford MG head on it. That was very easy to use. The recommendations above about negative toning and changing developing time and developers will all work, but all those variables get difficult to control should you want to reprint consistently.

 

[Bill Burk]

I use graded paper, Ilford Galerie 2 and 3 whenever I can. I like the fact that I can be decisive.

When a negative is over the edge, I will pick up Ilford MGIV. But even then I will have a specific grade in mind for that negative.

It might be fair to say I work as if I am using graded papers even when I use multigrade.

 

[Vaughn]

It has been 20 years since I did a lot of silver printing -- Iflord Gallerie for neutral colored prints, and Agfa Portriga Rapid for warm.

Graded papers offered more paper surfaces and colors. The surface of Portriga Rapid 111 (glossy) was beautiful. I used a combo of Selectol-soft and Dektol to get paper grades between 2 and 3 with Grade 3 paper.

 

[henk@apug]

Thanks all for your comments !

 

[George Collier]

Michael R brings up a good point about stained negs. I tried a Pyro variation (ABC, I think) some time ago, which produced a soft, very long scale neg, very nice for some applications, but the neg had a greenish cast. This had too much effect on my Aristo V54 lamp and filter combination, adding a lower contrast component to the mix, and resulted in very long exposures with I compensated with bluer end filtration. If I was more committed to the Pyro, graded paper might have been an option, which wouldn't have responded to the color of the neg (or, at least, not as much).

 

[Bill Burk]

Graded papers ... work differently with negatives that have been developed in some staining developers. These are some differences to be aware of, but not good or bad qualities.

In a recent thread the effect of stain on the contrast of Multigrade paper was evaluated.

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

There are no advantages to using graded papers compared to current VC papers, unless you value having much less flexibility in printing (particularly when working with difficult negatives).

Strong opinion, but not a fair summation of the advantages and disadvantages...

I'll grant that there are many advantages delivered by today's high-quality Multigrade paper.

But having a benchmark that encourages you to make more consistent quality negatives isn't the only advantage of graded papers.

The stuff seems to last forever.

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

Graded paper can be beautiful. I prefer MG paper because I can change grades in fraction of a grade and you can do split grade printing.

 

[kevs]

Hi Michael,

As with most things, flexibility comes at a price. As you've found, I've found that graded papers generally are more responsive to toners, especially chlorobromide 'warmtone' papers. If you split-tone with selenium, this can mean that the colour change is more obvious and it's easier to gauge when to 'pull' the print from the toner. I'm thinking mainly of Ilford Gallerie FB, which is a 'bromo-chloride' paper, and gives a rich, warm brown in selenium. Ilford Multigrade IV FB, which takes a very slight bluish tone in selenium. Gallerie also seems to give a richer tone in sulphide.

IMO they're different products, neither one is better nor worse. If you never tone your prints, stick with Multigrade and you won't see much difference. If you tone, you'll love the Gallerie unless you don't want a colour change. Bear in mind that the last time I used either seriously was 5 years ago and they might have changed radically since then. I don't know what other graded papers are still available. YMMV of course.

Cheers,
kevs

 

[Bill Burk]

Hey Michael,

I don't want to dampen your enthusiasm for Multigrade paper. It's for you, it's not for me. That's just two sides of a discussion about material that we are both passionate about.

So I'm still waiting for an advantage (besides keeping properties, possibly) that applies generally.

With graded papers I can see the easel better for focusing and composing.

 

[Vaughn]

The only other arguments I hear in favor of graded papers are usually esoteric, abstract, vague accounts ("graded papers look beautiful"). What does that mean exactly? Compared to what? Which paper?

I believe it comes down to the much larger number of brands, types, surfaces, etc that were available in graded papers than were available in VC papers. The chances of finding a graded paper that matched one's vision (thus more "beautiful") were much higher than with the very few choices one had with VC papers.

As graded papers disappeared from the marketplace and new VC papers arriving, this has reversed somewhat.

Vaughn

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

I worked for an old school photographer that graduated from Brooks. He hated VC paper. He believes that a good photographer should "build" a negative to fit a specific grade of paper. You sure have to have your film processing dialed in to hit that small target.

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

I agree. I think it's a good way to train yourself on film processing and printing. Probably a good way to teach students analog photographic processes too.

 

[Vaughn]

I agree. I think it's a good way to train yourself on film processing and printing. Probably a good way to teach students analog photographic processes too.

And it is good experience for moving into alternative processes that require very different parameters.

 

[chimneyfinder]

One overlooked property of graded paper - Bill may have been alluding to this - is that you do not need a means of filtration for control. No learning of dial in filtration is required, no choice of filter sytem and no concern as to wether you are using 'reliable' filters. I'm not saying this is advantageous or otherwise, just saying.
I use a large range of papers most of which are variable grade. I use split grade printing succesfully, though I probably use more test paper for fine tuning than is economical, but I actually prefer to work with graded paper, partly because of the considerations above and with my long experience of printing I'd be pretty content to use Grades 2 and 3 for the bulk of my needs.
The reason for my continued use of variable grade is that it seems to just come my way over the years in quantity for various reasons, and because there are some really interesting and diverse papers that are only made as variable grade. When I've reduced my stock to a lower level I will buy more fixed grade.

Regards, Mark Walker.

 

[ChuckP]

There are some curve differences between graded and VC. Look at the tech sheets for MGIV and Gallerie. The Gallerie still shows the now unavailable grades 1 and 4. The highlight area shows more change with grade in the graded paper. I have heard about this before. If these data sheets are correct Gallerie #1 and MGIV #1 would look different. Of course finding graded papers in extreme contrasts is impossible now except for buying old paper.

 

[henk@apug]

Friday, I will be heading to Brussels and buy some Ilford IlfoBrom Grade 2 and 3.
Then I will print some negatives which fit these grades, and print them as well on
ilford multigrade IV. I will take the time to produce the best prints within my (limited)
printing skills and compare.

I'll post my findings, but this may take a while

 

[henk@apug]

Oeps, very expensive stuff. Price almost double MG IV FB.
I do not know if I should give it a try.
I do not think that the quality will be double as well...
and to me MG IV FB is already really good.

 

[K-G]

Oeps, very expensive stuff. Price almost double MG IV FB.
I do not know if I should give it a try.
I do not think that the quality will be double as well...
and to me MG IV FB is already really good.

If you order from Silverprint in London, Galerie is only 10 - 15 % more than MGIV FB .
Give it a try.

http://www.silverprint.co.uk/index.asp


Karl-Gustaf