• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

I discovered a new paper today - I have some Adox questions.

rwboyer

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Oct 16, 2009
Messages
522
Location
MD USA
Format
Medium Format
Well it's new to me. Adox MCC 110 or some such thing.

I bought a sampler pack of this stuff for like $5 or something a while back and finally got around to trying it. Wow. I like it. A lot. I mean I have been stuck in a rut for a long time with paper that costs about the same or more than this but available everywhere and so... I guess I was stuck in a rut.

I really really might standardize on this stuff - It is cheap enough, It looks great in plain old Dektol.

My big question is I know I am going to buy a batch of this but now I am really really curious about the Adox Fine Print Vario Classic as well.

Here are a couple of questions:

1)How does the Vario Classic compare to the MCC 110?

2)I have used Dektol forever as well as Ansco 130 and Weston Amidol depending on the subject, I would say Dektol is my standard, the other two are specials - Anyone know how the MCC and Fine Print Vario react to other developers?

3)Where has this stuff been hiding? I thought all paper (with like 2 exceptions that I am not willing to pay for) had all gone to hell and was all just about the same stuff.

RB

Ps. I think it might be bye bye for Ilford MG IV for me (Galarie can stay for a bit but only on special occasions)
 
I think it is a useful exercise to buy a bunch of different paper from time to time and do a blind comparison. You could always do a more elaborate, scientifically valid test, but even printing one negative over and over on different paper is interesting. I recently posted the following on another forum. FYI:

Current Paper Comparison Test

First, I apologize for being wordy.

Some years ago I decided to standardize on a single paper for most of my printing. At the time, I made a standard straight print on many of the available papers, few of which are available today. I tested Forte, Luminos, Zone VI Brilliant, Kodak Polymax FA, and Ilford MG. After blind comparison, I chose Kodak Polymax as my paper (I was secretly hoping for something more exotic but Kodak won fair and square.) Then, of course, Kodak promptly announced its exit from the paper business. I did a quick test of a few others and went with Kentmere Fineprint VC FB paper.

Some years have passed and I thought it was time to sample the Freestyle catalog and do another paper comparison. For film, I use BTZS methods with good results. I admit that for paper I am a bit more lax and simply print what looks good to me. So this paper test was fairly subjective. I chose a scene of a black lava flow from Hawaii that was abstract and therefore open to interpretation of how the print should look. I printed it straight with just subtle edge burning. I use TMAX film developed in XTOL 1:1. For printing I use a Beseler Dichro 45S light source and a Schneider Apo-Componon 150 mm lens. The developer is Zone VI for 2 minutes. Selenium toning was somewhat arbitrary but I chose a dilution of 1:20 for 2 minutes. I made two prints on each paper, one for selenium toning and the other un-toned. I used the following 8x10 papers:
Adox MCC 110
Adox Vario Classic
Fomabrom variable contrast
Fomatone MG (a warmtone paper with velvet surface)
Kentmere Fineprint VC FB
Ilford MG IV FB
Oriental Warmtone
Varycon

I tried to print all of them at the same density and same contrast. The scene required about grade 3 filtration. I used the same filtration on all of the papers except two. Some observations:
Kentmere is the least contrasty and the fastest of the group
Ilford is the contrastiest of the group
The warmtone papers, Oriental Warmtone and Fomatone MG, are by far the slowest

After drying, I laid out the prints on the kitchen table which is well lit. I arranged them in pairs with the untoned version on top and the toned version on the bottom. Then I used a panel of three people (my wife, my 10 year old daughter, and myself) one at a time and blinded to the others to judge the prints on these characteristics:
Coldest: Kentmere (unanimous), followed by Ilford
Warmest: Fomabrom (unanimous)
Flattest: Kentmere
Curliest: Varycon and Ilford
Most responsive to selenium toner: Kentmere, Varycon
Least responsive to selenium toner: Ilford, Fomabrom
Favorite: Kentmere, Kentmere, Adox MCC 110
Least Favorite: Adox MCC 110, Fomabrom, Ilford

The two warmtone papers, Oriental and Fomatone MG, were very similar. Each had a yellowish paper base which diminished after drying. Each printed as a rather off-putting greenish-yellow black when untoned. Each was extremely responsive to toner and yielded a very nice brown-black final tone. I think these are both excellent warmtone papers even though I almost always prefer cold tone papers for my prints. I preferred the Oriental because it has a glossy surface rather than the “velvet” surface of the Fomatone MG which feels a bit like sandpaper and causes a slight loss of snap to the image.

For the other papers, the Varycon, Fomabrom, and Adox Vario Classic were very similar with Fomabrom being the warmest black of the bunch.

I was pleased that I preferred the Kentmere paper because it confirms my previous bias and I recently bought a huge supply! But I also realized that all of the papers were excellent and I felt confident that I could print well with any of them. So these are my verdicts:
Adox MCC 110 – ranked both favorite and least favorite! Slightly warm tone.
Adox Vario Classic, Fomabrom, Varycon - “middle of the road” papers. Varycon the cheapest.
Ilford MG IV FB – contrasty, cold toned, most expensive
Kentmere FP VC – unanimous favorite print, coldest when selenium toned, inexpensive
Fomatone MG – great warmtone paper with velvet surface, chocolate black with selenium
Oriental Warmtone - favorite warmtone paper with glossy surface, chocolate black with selenium

These are just my thoughts from a very un-scientific test. More like a wine tasting than a rigorous comparison but I thought it was fun.
 
That's exactly the kind of test I like doing periodically. There are so many variables involved in printing that the best way to learn what works for you is to make the best prints you can on a selection of prints with maybe two or three negs on each paper, using your own process, and seeing what looks best. Then you've got a file of reference prints and can work on refining the process with whatever looks best.
 
Thanks,

actually choosing a paper is a lot like choosing a wine, choosing a paper and a developer for a specific image used to be like pairing a wine to food. So I think that for your purposes it was very valid.

One thing that intrigues me is that you picked the Adox MCC as a favorite and a least favorite - I am assuming based on the limited words about that particular thing that you did not like that the blacks were slightly warm. I actually like that a lot - most warm tone papers turn me off and I love un-ferrotyped glossy FB.

So... I guess you liked the MCC for the same reasons I like it except for the slight warmishness without going full blown brownish warm- that I also love.

Just a guess.

RB

 
Don't feel too bad, this paper is pretty new, sort of, it's the reborn agfa mcc, but it hasn't been around all that long. Glad to hear that the new stuff is worth trying out. I'm looking forward to trying it out.
 

Close. What I meant was that I ranked it my least favorite and either my wife or my daughter ranked it the favorite. I do prefer cool tone papers but I just did not like the overall tonality with the negative I printed.

Like I said though, I thought that all of them were good papers and I did not try to make my best print. Instead I made a straight print with each and compared.
 
I think all photographic products should have, 'DON'T FALL IN LOVE!' in large letters on their labels. There is no photographic product that I've used and loved over my 40+ years in photography that's still being made. Not a single one.
Don't think this is a recent phenomena, either. I saw Defender products vanish before I got my first drivers license.
The only thing to do is buy what you like for as long as it's available.
-30-
 

In my case women should have the same warning.

RB
 
Adox 110 is a great paper. I ordered 200 sheets and love it.

My only gripe, posted more than once, it the small size of packages. A 25 sheet package makes the per sheet cost over $1.00. If it was sold in a 100 sheet box you would expect the pricing to be around 80 cents per sheet, 250 sheet boxes even cheaper.

I hope as they settle into production and distribution they are able to offer the volume discounts. If they don't I probably will buy a different brand for casual use and save the 110 for serious stuff.

Just 2 cents worth.

Mike
 
Yes, it's on the pricey side...for now I'm cutting into 5x7s.

jeroldharter, I really need to do something similar...I got excited when I first went back to the darkroom and bought every paper that interested me a little. Thus far I've only done side-by-side comparisons of two papers at a time, although reasonably scientific--same negs, toned and untoned, different developers, etc. But I really should do this with more papers at once, and RC vs. FB.

To follow up with your test though, I have found absolutely no effect of selenium with Oriental WT at all. Two different negatives, one printed side-by-side with Emaks and one printed side-by-side with Polywarmtone. Was quite stunned to see no change with selenium and 1+19 so I moved up to 1+9. In both cases I also tried 10+ minutes, when often the change is apparent on WT paper around 5 minutes. I'll give it another try but I'd chalked Oriental up to just not having any change with Se and planned to try some sepia or brown toner next.
 
rwboyer said:
Well it's new to me. Adox MCC 110
Click to expand...

Does anyone know if and where I can get this paper in 100 sheet boxes of 8x10? 25 sheets isn't enough for me to tell if I even really like it.
 

I just did some printing this weekend with the Oriental WT FB paper, and toned it in ilford selenium toner 1:4 for about 3 minutes, and found that it toned very nicely to a brownish-red. Are you using the FB or RC paper?

Cheers,
Bryan
 
c6h6o3 said:
Does anyone know if and where I can get this paper in 100 sheet boxes of 8x10? 25 sheets isn't enough for me to tell if I even really like it.
Click to expand...

They haven't made anything other than 25 sheet packets yet.

Having to manufacture and launch a new/re-worked/revised product, ties a huge amount of money up. To keep their overheads down it was decided to package all the first run of the new product in 25 sheet packs.

If one box isn't enough just buy a couple of 25 sheet packs and playing with it - it might or might not be the paper for you.

We should all just be glad that the paper is available at all - it demanded a huge leap of faith and enormous financial commitment to resurrect it.

It may be we can get larger packets/boxes of the paper at some time in the future

Martin
 

I suspect that the Oriental WT was RC, not FB paper. My prints on the Oriental FB paper untoned had a subtle yellow-green tint that became very un-subtle and off-putting next to the selenium toned print which easily turned a deep red-brown tone. I toned for 2 minutes with KRST mixed 1:19 with a PermaWash solution. The Fomatone warm tone paper had a similar robust response to selenium toning. I did not try other toner dilutions.
 
naugastyle said:
Mine is FB. I don't think there is an Oriental WT RC, is there? I will try my 1+3 solution this weekend, but Jerold is getting results in 1+19 in only 2 minutes, which mystifies me.
Click to expand...

How old is your paper? Mine is brand new. I don't recall the specifics, but I vaugely remember talk of the emulsion changing for this paper a few times fairly recently.
 
New (a couple months old, I mean). There was some type of change for sure because the swatch book at B&H had something slightly different to the name (like Warmtone G, which is not really the name, but it was some small difference like that).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register