Ilford Multigrade V...FB?

[gone]

What about the plastic waste you produce by buying resin coated papers? Do you account that at all?

This is true, but the numbers are pretty small. Not many people in the world are printing RC papers in darkrooms. We can't avoid buying the chemicals in plastic containers or bags anyway.

The truth is, no one really knows how long the new RC papers will last. We do know how long the FB will last, but again, all bets are off if it wasn't processed correctly, and no one will know about that until many, many years later.

 

[DREW WILEY]

The amount of plastic involved in an RC coating is ridiculously small if one just looks at the vinyl and poly surrounding us everywhere in our own kitchens or living rooms, not to mention how nearly every kind of product consumers buy these days is packaged in disposable plastic. But I admit that I've never taken a shower along with RC prints pressed to a tile wall. That's a new one to me!

 

[albada]

This isn't a paper problem, it's an operator problem. The answer is to be found in the technical data sheets, and hinges around understanding that almost no 'G2' grades are identical in terms of ISO(R).

Kentmere exposed with a G1 filter = ISO(R) 110
Kentmere exposed with a G2 filter = ISO(R) 95

MGIV exposed with a G2 filter = ISO(R) 110
MGIV exposed with a G3 filter = ISO(R) 90

MGV(RC Deluxe) exposed with a G1 filter = ISO(R) 110
MGV(RC Deluxe) exposed with a G2 filter = ISO(R) 90

As for why Ilford did this - diffusion heads are dominant worldwide today & getting a more even spread of grades in the ISO(R) 50-100 range is more useful than in the 100+ range.

These numbers might explain why a prior poster has troubles getting good grays from the new MG Deluxe (aka "MG V"): Its contrast is higher than MGIV. And these numbers provide the solution: Use the next softer (lower numbered) filter. BTW, according to Ralph Lambrecht's excellent book "Way Beyond Monochrome" (2nd ed.), pages 298 and 303, the ISO standard for grade 2 is ISO(R) 105, which yields an exposure range of 3.5 stops (on the paper) between zones II and VIII.

Mark Overton

 

[Lachlan Young]

These numbers might explain why a prior poster has troubles getting good grays from the new MG Deluxe (aka "MG V"): Its contrast is higher than MGIV. And these numbers provide the solution: Use the next softer (lower numbered) filter. BTW, according to Ralph Lambrecht's excellent book "Way Beyond Monochrome" (2nd ed.), pages 298 and 303, the ISO standard for grade 2 is ISO(R) 105, which yields an exposure range of 3.5 stops (on the paper) between zones II and VIII.

Mark Overton

To quote Agfa P-50-P: "The printing range of a photographic paper is the term for the difference in exposure between a defined maximum and minimum density. This “contrast-forming capacity” of the paper grades could be represented arithmetically by the ratio of the threshold exposure to maximum exposure, e.g. 1:4, 1:10, 1:32. It is however usual to state the printing range logarithmically. The logarithms of the numerical ratios given above are: R 60, R 100 and R 150 (in accordance with ISO Standard 6846)."

Very few fixed grade papers complied tightly with G2 = ISO(R) 105 - many tended to land anywhere between 100 and 120, though quite a few cluster around 110. If you get really bored you can then apply flare factors for condenser & diffusion heads and see where things would really end up when in practical use. Today, all that 'G2' really means is where the ISO (R) of a variable contrast paper lands when exposed to tungsten source without filtration (or with a G2 filter).

 

[kevs]

Try MGFB Cooltone instead.

Thanks Lachlan; if only they made it in matt finish... *sighs*

TBH, I'm mostly out of photography these days so I don't see myself buying more paper in the future.

 

[BMbikerider]

Hope not!
Imho this new RC paper is terrible. It's basically Kentmere RC... but sold at premium Ilford price. It's very hard to get decent grays with this MGV while the "old" MGIV would deliver lovely delicate grays.

If you use the MGV to make contact prints, any picture that was overexposed will be rendered a a blank white indecipherable rectangle. With the MGIV paper you could at least see bits of details.

This is NOT Kentmere under a different name. I doubt if you have the technical knowhow or insider information to make a sweeping statements!

I have both in my darkroom and there is a world of difference The Kentmere fibre has not sold for a number of years (I have a few 12x16 sheets and half a box of 5x7 left) and a box or two of the current RC. The old Kentmere factory was operating under some quite questionable Health and Safety conditions so the old emulsion had to go and apparently not profitable.

Compared to both Kentmere papers, the tone of MG5 is warm almost verging on a chloro-bromide - but not quite. The tones of MG4 fibre based was as neutral as anything else I have seen, but the tones of the Kentmere RC is 'cool', but not so much as Ilford cool-tone.

In addition, MG5 is about 1/2 a stop faster than the old MG4, where as I find Kentmere both RC and fibre are about twice as sensitive as the old MG4
The contrast variation conveyed by the new emulsion is designed to give more even steps in the different grades. (Ilford public statement, not my idea plucked out of the ether.)

So saying the MG5 is a reincarnation of the Kentmere is complete and utter rubbish. They are as different as chalk and cheese