Is there a reason to use graded BW paper anymore?

[Mainecoonmaniac]

I'm at an age where I don't remember using graded papers much. Many years ago, I had a conversation with a photo old timer and he told me that graded paper was better and mutigrade paper was for photographers that didn't know how to control the contrast of their negatives. His philosophy was to "Build your negative for your paper". To be honest, I've used graded paper and it's too much work. As for my negatives, it usually print between a grade 1 and grade 3 with multigraded paper.

 

[jamesgignac]

I usually use multigrade myself and have always felt a little...well...insecure about it when chatting with other printers. That being said it's certainly not the way it use to be back when I studied photography and graded papers were significantly better...

So, I don't know I'm sure a lot of people here swear by graded so it would be nice to follow this thread.

 

[glbeas]

The tonal curve of multigrade papers are a bit mushy compared to graded paper because of there being two different emulsions coated on the paper. I've always gotten the best looking prints from graded.

 

[domaz]

Graded papers really shouldn't be too much work. After all it's it easier just to pull out another grade from the paper safe than chaging out the grade filter. I think the reason people prefer graded papers so much is that the contrast grades are cleaning and better looking than can normally be achieved with multigrade paper.

 

[Rick A]

I still keep graded paper around. If you are consistant in your exposures then you are shooting for a single grade of paper.Pick the contrast that suits your style then expose and develope for it. If your exposures are all over the place, then use multi-contrast, and adjust your printing to account for it. I use mostly grade 2 and occasionally need some G3 or G4, but that is a rarity. The times I find myself reaching for MC is to tame a contrasty negative, then I'm printing for G1, or going for a split grade print.

 

[martyryan]

I used to use only graded papers for years but the MC papers have improved so much from 25-30 years ago that I have only been using MC lately, my prints compare with those made in the past.

Marty

 

[Ektagraphic]

I need to get some graded....I end up printing filterless all the time anyways....

 

[thisismyname09]

When I was reading about toning and looking for a good type of paper for it, it seemed that there were more types of graded paper that were good for toning than multigrade.

 

[dpurdy]

If I was printing with filters for VC I would use graded. But as I use an Aristo VC head that I can change the color of light I prefer the VC paper. Being frustrated with print quality lately I recently did a lot of paper tests, both graded and VC side by side printing tests. For the life of me I could not demonstrate any advantage to graded paper. To my taste Oriental WT and Ilford WT VC FB are the best papers out there.

 

[dancqu]

Or Know How to Control the Grade of Their Graded Paper

...mutigrade paper was for photographers that didn't
know how to control the contrast of their negatives.

The grade of a Graded paper is not fixed. Choice of
developer alone can allow for at least a grade's variation
on many papers. Also post exposure pre-development latent
image bleaching, SLIMT, makes Graded paper grade
changes easy.

I don't like VC because, as has been mentioned, VC density
curves versis grade are nothing to brag about. Also the low
level of darkroom lighting needed for VC papers is not to
my liking. I've decided not to put up with it. Graded
papers are blue sensitive only so allow for quite
a high level of safe lighting.

I'm sticking with Graded. Dan

 

[Doremus Scudder]

Dan,

Me too, for all the reasons you mention and a few more. I manage intermediate contrast with split developing and SLIMT techniques plus water-bath for really contrasty (historical) negatives.

One important difference is the way graded papers respond to negatives developed in staining developers. With VC papers, the stain often acts as a contrast-reducing mask in proportion to the density. This is fine if it's what you are after, but often I am not.

Best,

Doremus Scudder
www.DoremusScudder.com

 

[Richard Jepsen]

Why use graded.....non developer incorporated graded paper may have a longer shelf life. Safelight levels can be higher with graded. Some graded papers may be sharper than Ilford Multigrade. There may be smoother contrast curves with graded paper. But the real reason is each paper has a unique contrast curve, tone and look. I find Galerie grade 3 and EMAKs #3 compliment each other. EMAKS #3 is about 1/2 grade harder than Galerie #3. Galerie has brighter whites which project more in a print sized for a wall mount. I use two different enlarger light sources to adjust contrast. DEKTOL vs 130 provides additional contrast control. If the negative doesn't fit the paper I don't print it. And finally, there is a certain elegance in not fussing with filters or split filtration. David Vestal wrote somthing to the effect that you know you have a good negative if it prints easy.

 

[jp498]

There is something to be said for sure for getting the negatives right in shooting/processing.

I use VC paper though. I like it because I use a color head, and can often see noticeable contrast differences in fractions of a grade. Like 15magenta can look a lot different than 30magenta for some images. I can watch the easel while spinning the color knob to see what looks right and the contrast prints right. Sort of like looking at how thin or thick a negative is you know it looks intuitively right, you can do the same visual judgement with magenta/yellow and contrast.

I have no need for grade 0 or 5, and rare need for grade 4 (such as for printing an exposure mistake). I think if the contrast range of VC paper were smaller, it would be more socially acceptable among experienced photographers and easier to visualize a contrast, but not as practical.

Ilford's warmtone is my choice for warmtone VC, but I like Foma's paper better for neutral tone VC.

 

[5stringdeath]

I can watch the easel while spinning the color knob to see what looks right and the contrast prints right. Sort of like looking at how thin or thick a negative is you know it looks intuitively right, you can do the same visual judgement with magenta/yellow and contrast.

I like your thinking here, which is where I'm trying to "get." I was / am the kind of person who is always looking for the published m/y combinations for a grade ... instead of working intuitively. I mean, in general I can look at my negs and know right off which filter I'll need (thinking of under the lens method) and it never occured to me to work the same way with my dichronic head.

I salut you sir!

On the other hand, if I can read my negs so well, why don't I just use graded papers? hehe.

 

[Mahler_one]

Doremus: You certainly do great work...might I ask what the SLIMT techniques are? Thanks. Also...on ILford Gallerie, do you find that water bath treatment is very effective on lowering contrast? Thanks again.

 

[Mahler_one]

OK...I found the references to SLIMT provided by David Kachel. However, please add any information that you have found while making your prints Doremus. As an aside, where will you be singing this year? In Europe?

Ed

 

[Richard Jepsen]

I normally use a color head and dial in filtration levels. However for 6 months I explored two graded papers. I judge my negatives on a light table and can predict with 80% accurancy how negatives will print. I find simplicity with projecting good negatives and accepting what the paper gives me. That's not to say I accept less than excellent results. I just have less options. And there are times I wish to increase local contrast. However, using graded paper and printing to 8x10 or larger made me more aware of burning/dodging controls affecting broader areas of contrast. I have less flexibility but find the results equally if not more satisfying when the negative fits the paper curve. Its all about the negative. Good ones print easy.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

The grade of a Graded paper is not fixed. Choice of
developer alone can allow for at least a grade's variation
on many papers. Also post exposure pre-development latent
image bleaching, SLIMT, makes Graded paper grade
changes easy...

There is room for both. VC papers can have a 'bump' in the characteristic curve, especially at softer grades. The transition between three emulsions is not always smooth.

However, the great benefit of VC papers is not just having all contrast grades in one box of paper. You have all contrast grades within one sheet of paper! The sky can be printed at grade 5 while the foreground is printed at grade 2 for example. Also, minor contrast optimizations are easy. I often change the paper grade by just 1/4 grade and have fine-tuned to 1/8 of a grade to get the shadow contrast just right.

I've tried SLIMT, but it's not for me. Nevertheless, graded papers have a unique beauty, and I can see why people like to use them. Once in control of a specific paper, they can be worth the effort. It's a different way of working and often a different result.

As I said, there is room and reason for both.

 

[dancqu]

SLIMT - Contrast Corrections

OK...I found the references to SLIMT provided by
David Kachel. Ed

In effect SLIMT, a post exposure pre-development bleach,
increases shadow area densities in the negative. Additional
exposure is needed in order to maintain good shadow area
density in the print. High light densities in the negative
which might not print at all are drug along with that
additional exposure. The contrast range of the
negative is compressed.

In effect a negative which through exposure and/or
development has too great a contrast range is made
correct. Corrections can be minor or major.

Once the exposure characteristics for a paper have
been established and it's solution's working strength
known all that follows is short soak in an EXTREMELY
dilute potassium ferricyanide solution. Dan

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Maybe, we should open or add to an already existing SLIMT thread to continue this discussion. I'm interested in trying it again, especially the archival impact.

 

[Tom Kershaw]

SLIMT?

Tom

 

[Richard Jepsen]

SLIMT negative manipulation may be a little too fussy for me.

Galerie is responsive to bleaching, so I read. With graded paper I can compensate somewhat for less than optimum shadow contrast by dodging and burning to create a wider tonal range in broader areas. Toning increases shadow contrast. Bleaching brightens highlights. You can also selenium tone a negative to increase contrast. There is no doubt VC paper is more flexible and adjusts exposure errors in the negative. With graded paper less control can simplify printing. Less control results in some negatives not getting printed. You don't waste time fussing with hard to print negatives. If the image is a local landscape I will go back and shoot it again in MF to get the right negative. My favorite papers no longer are available and my negatives don't print well on Ilford MG. The two graded papers I'm exploring appear sharper than Ilford MG IV with a print color I prefer. There is a place in the serious darkroom for both graded and VC.

EMAKS is a very good paper attractively priced.

 

[Mahler_one]

In effect SLIMT, a post exposure pre-development bleach,
increases shadow area densities in the negative. Additional
exposure is needed in order to maintain good shadow area
density in the print. High light densities in the negative
which might not print at all are drug along with that
additional exposure. The contrast range of the
negative is compressed.

In effect a negative which through exposure and/or
development has too great a contrast range is made
correct. Corrections can be minor or major.

Once the exposure characteristics for a paper have
been established and it's solution's working strength
known all that follows is short soak in an EXTREMELY
dilute potassium ferricyanide solution. Dan

Thanks for taking the time and effort to reply!

Ed

 

[Mahler_one]

EMAKS is a very good paper attractively priced.[/QUOTE]


EMAKS developed in Amidol achieves very impressive DMAX. I agree with your assessment Richard.

Regarding EMAKS: Do you use a red safelight as recommended, or do you find that an OC safelight can be used without problems?

 

[Richard Jepsen]

I use EMAKS graded with a red safelight near the enlarger and OC safelight over trays with no degradation. Previously I experienced no fog issues with EMAKS graded and a Thomas Duplex. I do minimize time under the safelights. Galerie is reported to be very OC safe.