Ilford paper vs. Ultrafine

[pschauss]

I recently bought some Ultrafine Plus RC variable contrast paper to compare it to the Ilford RC VC paper that I have been using. I leave the paper in the developer for 1 minute, but on the Ilford paper the image seems to reach more or less full development (judging by how dark it looks under the safelight) in about 30 seconds. With the Ultrafine Plus the image has barely started to appear by this time and takes a full minute before the blacks are really dark.

I should add that I use a slot processor and, therefore, reuse the developer for several weeks, topping it up before each printing session. Adding fresh developer speeds up the process a bit for the Ultrafine paper, but it still takes the better part of a minute. Does the ilford paper have a developer of some sort built in which speeds up the process?

 

[fschifano]

I don't know if the Ilford paper has a developer incorporated or an acellerant. From your description though I'd say that Ultrafine is repackaging FOMA papers. I've noticed that the image takes a lot longer to emerge with the FOMA materials compared to some others. I usually develop these for at least 2 1/2 minutes in Dektol 1+2 or 1+3. Other RC papers are done in 90 seconds or less.

 

[pschauss]

Does Foma paper have a water mark on the back which says B/W Paper?

 

[fschifano]

Not the stuff I have. I got mine from Freestyle rebadged as Arista.EDU Ultra. I know it is Foma RC, VC paper because Freestyle is not at all reticent about revealing the sources of their house brand products when they can.

 

[Rich Ullsmith]

Pete, are you saying you have two brands of papers, and with identical exposures and identical development, one develops more fully than the other?

 

[pschauss]

Rich,
They both develop fully in 60 seconds. The image just appears more quickly with the Ilford paper.

Frank,
I thought that Arista Edu Ultra, which I have also used, was Kentmere. Arista Edu Ultra behaved the same way as the Ultrafine paper only it was almost a whole grade higher contrast, when printed with a #2 Ilford filter, than the Ilford paper.

 

[removed account4]

photowarehouse / ultrafine paper used to be ilford
i have no idea what it might be now ...

 

[jim appleyard]

Some of the PW/Ultrafine had "B/W paper" as a watermark on the back. Some is re-boxed Kodak. I think they re-box whatever paper is at the best price at that time and sell it under one name. You never know who's paper you're getting, but the price is good and I use it mostly for contact sheets and work prints.

 

[fschifano]

No, the Arista.EDU Ultra is FOMA. Arista II is supposed to be rebadged Kentmere. At least it says "made in England," and started selling after Ilford announced no more private re-labeling and before Ilford announced the acquisition of Kentmere. I have a box of it around here somewhere, and it's not bad. Contrast for a given filtration is higher than the Foma product.

 

[pschauss]

You are right Frank. I just looked up my order and it was Arista II that I was using.

It is kind of fun trying to figure out what everybody's house brand really is, but I miss Adorama's house brand (Ilford?) paper.

 

[PHOTOTONE]

Ilford/Harman has stated that they will continue the agreements/contracts that Kentmere had with vendors such as Freestyle, so one can assume Freestyle will continue to offer their "made in England" paper. Ilford/Harman has only been "picky" with products sold for full price under the Ilford brand name.

 

[fschifano]

I miss it too. That was good stuff and really inexpensive. I still have some around and use it from time to time for images that I really like. Most of the stuff I do is real knock off stuff, so the Arista.EDU Ultra is plenty good enough.