Ilford MGWT - 2.4K?

[M Carter]

Cleaned out a friend's darkroom - (whoop, got some 16x20 PWT!!) She also had several 16x20 packs of Ilford MGWT semi-matte, but it has "2.4K" printed prominently on the label.

Current MGWT packaging doesn't say "2.4K" (I have a Bromoil book that shows the 2.4 packaging as a suitable Bromoil paper though). Does anyone know if there are differences between the older 2.4K papers and the current stock from Ilford? Wondering if I should save this for Bromoil testing? Were there major changes to the emulsion/coating/paper at some point?

 

[tedr1]

I don't know the answer however in the past an email to Ilford in the UK with technical questions has produced a quick and helpful response.

 

[M Carter]

Thank you, I'll try that - it's kind of been my experience that if there was an emulsion or feature change, often the manufacturers downplay that as nothing or "didn't happen" when it's obvious to the end user that something's very different... hoping someone has real-world experience!

 

[Lachlan Young]

24K has been Ilford's code for semi-matte for a very long time & 5K has been matte equally long. All of this pre-dates any & all MGWT by decades. Your book is likely referring to old Ilfobrom (not Galerie) or something like that. No known emulsion changes to MGWT since its introduction about 20 years ago & there's never been any suggestion as to it being usable for Bromoil.

 

[M Carter]

Thanks - I'm not referring to a book but to some older unopened paper I acquired recently.

The book "Bromoil: A Foundation Course" (by Derek Watkins, 2006) has a photograph showing suitable papers - one of the papers in the stack is the older MGWT packaging with the MGW.24K graphic on the label - it's most definitely MGWT, it matches the photo below of the paper I picked up . I've done a Bromoil with Ilford's non-warmtone MG and it worked well, though it didn't get as deep a density as the original Foma 123 which was an excellent paper for me; my impression was I could dial the Ilford in with more testing, but I usually have lots of MGWT around. My concern was if the older packaging was an older version of the emulsion, but it sounds like this older paper should behave the same as current MGWT and Ilford has simply changed the label graphics at some point.

 

[Harman Tech Service]

Our Warmtone emulsion has not been changed. However, older paper will have a higher fog and lower contrast than fresh product.
We do not test our paper for Bromoil characteristics but I am not aware of any intentional changes we have made.
Thanks to Lachlan for the perfect answer to the original query. Our surface codes are:
1 = Glossy
24 = Semi Matt
25 = Satin
44 = Pearl
5 = Matt

M is Middleweight (most RC papers) and K is doubleweight (All FB and Portfolio RC)
From German - I hope these are spelt correctly:
K - kartonstark
M - mittelstark
P - papierstark (we haven't made any for years)

I was always told that the "." was put in as a spacer to make graded papers clearer. eg.IS3.1M.

David

 

[M Carter]

Our Warmtone emulsion has not been changed. However, older paper will have a higher fog and lower contrast than fresh product.

Thanks for the detailed reply! And yes, I'm aware of aged paper issues (I do mostly lith so my shelves have paper going back to the 60's). I've tested one sheet of the old stuff, barest hint of fog which will be no problem for lith or bromoil. (I am really coming to like MGWT with lith developer).

 

[kreeger]

Was lucky enough to snag an unopened box of MGFB 2.6K recently. Have not seen this surface in forever. Has anyone else seen this surface available?

If memory serves me, Velvet Stipple was comparable to Pearl in RC.

 

[darkroommike]

Was lucky enough to snag an unopened box of MGFB 2.6K recently. Have not seen this surface in forever. Has anyone else seen this surface available?

If memory serves me, Velvet Stipple was comparable to Pearl in RC.

View attachment 211705

I always compared Velvet Stipple to a Kodak E surface, a bit more gloss and a bit more texture than the Ilford Pearl.

 

[Lachlan Young]

Was lucky enough to snag an unopened box of MGFB 2.6K recently. Have not seen this surface in forever. Has anyone else seen this surface available?

If memory serves me, Velvet Stipple was comparable to Pearl in RC.

From what I've seen of it, Mike's comments are pretty accurate - it's quite a dense texture, relatively irregular in shape. Pearl is much more regular & much lower relief. Must admit that 26K is not a surface I care for. I think it probably died somewhere between the first of the modern Multigrade papers in the 80's (as per that box in your post & a contemporaneous paper sampler I've seen) & Multigrade IV in the early-mid 1990's. From the samples I've seen, it seems to have been available as a substrate for both Ilfobrom & Multigrade FB.

 

[kreeger]

Mike and Lachlan... Thanks for the feedback. When I get a chance I will make a print and share findings.