Kentmere Bromide users?

Donald Miller · Oct 9, 2005

McPhotoX said:
I think the only thing G-2 is good for, is if you shoot a VERY contrasty landscape scene in full sun and shade, and over expose and over develop it like crazy.

Best of luck to you!

Ryan McIntosh

Ryan,

For what it's worth, I have worked with Azo. I have done densitometric tests of both grade two and grade three.

Grade two Azo will require a negative that has a DR of 1.65 and the problem that prevents most photographers from experiencing the potential of the material is what you have mentioned in your post.

When a person over exposes and over develops, you end up with a lower DR negative then if you properly exposed the film and expanded the development.

Efke PL100 with the developer and concentration that you mention will deliver the DR that is required. I know because I have used it.

The advantage to Grade two Azo is that it very closely matches what a pt-pd printer requires in negative characteristics.

By the same token, Grade three Azo requires a DR of 1.35 and that is very similar to what a conventional enlarging paper requires.

As I have said, I have used both Azo (old and new formula) and I have used Forte and Oriental papers. I can come up with a image on Seagull and Forte that please me every bit as much as an Azo print.

I realize that everyone has their own particular tastes about things. What I am saying is that if one really understands the characteristics of their materials, then pleasing results can be obtained in a variety of ways.

I recognize your evangelistic enthusiasm. Good luck to you.

Mike A · Oct 10, 2005

McPhotoX said:
Mike,
What type of film/developer are you using, and how do you process your negtatives?

I was using JandC200 w/ HC-110, and would get decent looking prints on G-3, althought they were abit flat sometimes, because the tonal scale is so long on AZO.

I then changed my film/developer to Efke 100 using 2/2/100 Pyrocat HD in a rotating drum to get more contrast. With this process, it gives me a very dense and contrasty negative, and I am getting the perfect contrast on G-3. Sometimes I may need to bring down the contrast BARLY, so I use a waterbath developer to bring it down too a G-2 about.

Now, I would like to hear what other AZO uses find themself using more, but I find that I ONLY use G-3, and hardly ever need less contrast. G-2 is way too soft for me and its difficult to get a good black because the tonal scale on the paper is sooooo long!

What im trying to say is that chances are, you will use mostly the G-3 and hardly any of the NEW G-2. Since the paper is costly, you might want to just purchase the G-3, since you CAN bring the contrast down on that paper if needed. You could get a few 8x10 sheets of the new G-2 from somebody, just to try it out and see which look you like more. Maybe you are going for the soft look in your print, or maybe not!

I think the only thing G-2 is good for, is if you shoot a VERY contrasty landscape scene in full sun and shade, and over expose and over develop it like crazy.

Best of luck to you!

Ryan McIntosh

Ryan,
I'm using Pl100 w/Pyrocat HD 2/2/100 as well. I was using Ultrafine until they stopped selling it.
Mike

User Removed · Oct 10, 2005

Mike A said:
Ryan,
I'm using Pl100 w/Pyrocat HD 2/2/100 as well. I was using Ultrafine until they stopped selling it.
Mike

Well, I would suggest starting with G-3 then. If you want less contrast...simply use a waterbath and you can take it down to a G-2 almost. If you buy G-2, their is no way of bumping up the contrast, only bringing it down (and I dont know ANYONE that has done that).

What type of photography do you do? You don't have any images under your APUG gallery.

Ryan McIntosh

Alan Davenport · Oct 10, 2005

McPhotoX said:
Now, I would like to hear what other AZO uses find themself using more..

Ryan,

I use a little of the old G-2 but not much except for proofs (that is why I still have some left). My negatives seem to fit G-3 very closely. My film of choice is Tri-x in Pyrocat-HD 2:2:100 for 9 minutes. Sometimes I use a water bath with Amidol and G-3 but not often. Lately though I've been developing my prints in Ansco 130 at 1:2. I 'm really beginning to like the warm tones I get with it. I'm even doing more toning with Nelson Gold Toner. It provides quite a variety of tones from a trace of purple through a warm brown to a sepia tone depending on how long the paper is left in the toner.

Alan

James Bleifus · Nov 14, 2005

I think it's always important to remember that there is no such thing as the "best" paper, developer, etc. I was having a hard time getting my Azo prints to come to life (MAS described most of my prints as being too gray) and, last night, printed some problem negs with Kentmere Bromide and Amidol and had no problem bringing them to life. Not only did the Amidol give rich, rich blacks but also allowed for a water bath to control the contrast. The prints were so easy to make that I couldn't believe it. Zone zero has never been this easy before. The Kentmere blacks remind me of the old Oriental Seagull of the early '80s.

Does that mean that Kentmere Bromide is better than Azo? Not to me. It does mean that the Bromide/Amidol combination fits better with my vision, the way I shoot, my materials and the manner in which I develop film right now.

So definitely try the Azo but also try the Kentmere and decide which works best for you.

Cheers, James

c6h6o3 · Nov 14, 2005

McPhotoX said:
If you buy G-2, their is no way of bumping up the contrast, only bringing it down (and I dont know ANYONE that has done that).

I have quite a few negatives which require a water bath on the new (Canadian) Azo grade 2. My paper usage is about evenly divided between the new grade 2 and old grade 3 with water bath. I have almost no negatives which require straight grade 3.

c6h6o3 · Nov 14, 2005

James M. Bleifus said:
So definitely try the Azo but also try the Kentmere and decide which works best for you.

Cheers, James

Jim:

I'm most anxious to try the Kentmere papers, both for enlarging and for contact printing. Which specific ones do you recommend?

Jim

James Bleifus · Nov 14, 2005

Hi Jim,

I've only tried the Glossy Bromide Double Weight in grades 3 and 4. I bought it with the intent of printing a few negs that were a little too flat in Azo but, after trying it on some negs that I thought were printing fine, I can see I was under-developing for Azo. Grade 3 Kentmere feels about a half grade more contrasty than grade 3 Azo.

It has a similar feeling of depth as Azo. I used M&P's Amidol formula for enlarging paper with some extra kbr to warm things up. One experience that I've had different than other posters to this thread is speed. Some have said that the Kentmere is about a stop faster than Azo. I've found that I had to go from a 120W bulb to a 15W bulb. YMMV.

I'm so happy with the Kentmere that I've ordered 100 sheets in each available grade.

Cheers, James

c6h6o3 · Nov 14, 2005

So my 300W photoflood would probably nuke it beyond all recognition, eh?

What I'm really looking for is a good enlarging paper to replace Bergger VCNB, which is only occasionally available.

James Bleifus · Nov 15, 2005

Yeah, I think your 300 watt bulb may be a smidge too much. lol. My first 3 prints were dead black because I didn't realize how sensitive the Kentmere was to light, even using a 25 watt bulb.

Cheers, James

Donald Miller · Nov 15, 2005

James M. Bleifus said:
Yeah, I think your 300 watt bulb may be a smidge too much. lol. My first 3 prints were dead black because I didn't realize how sensitive the Kentmere was to light, even using a 25 watt bulb.

Cheers, James

What is the paper speed as listed on the package? That should provide some comparison to Azo and other papers.

Do you have the means to determine the curves and dmin and dmax of this paper? I am interested in it too.

lee · Nov 15, 2005

why not print this paper with the light from an enlarger lamp?

lee\c

James Bleifus · Nov 15, 2005

lee said:
why not print this paper with the light from an enlarger lamp?

lee\c

Don't own an enlarger . I'll check the speed on the box tonight when I get home.

Cheers, James

skillian · Nov 15, 2005

Hey James - hope things are well. I've been following this thread with interest and will give Kentmere a try.

Best,
Scott

doughowk · Nov 15, 2005

I just tried contact printing Kentmere Bromide with good results. My densest 8X10 neg required 60 sec @ f/8 under enlarger. The same neg requires 30 sec under 75w bulb for grade 2 AZO. I'll have to show the prints to our local AZO guru to see what he thinks of the Kentmere vs AZO. I do think it would be difficult to print the Kentmere under a bulb since it is so much faster.

James Bleifus · Nov 15, 2005

Donald Miller said:
What is the paper speed as listed on the package? That should provide some comparison to Azo and other papers.

Do you have the means to determine the curves and dmin and dmax of this paper? I am interested in it too.

Hi Donald,

I'm unable to find a speed for the paper on the package. As for curves, etc, I don't own a densitometer so I have no way to measure such things. Maybe someone else on the list who tries the paper can provide the information.

One interesting difference with Azo is that the highlights on the Kentmere feel like they dry UP a little bit rather than drying down.

Cheers, James

Donald Miller · Nov 15, 2005

James M. Bleifus said:
Hi Donald,

I'm unable to find a speed for the paper on the package. As for curves, etc, I don't own a densitometer so I have no way to measure such things. Maybe someone else on the list who tries the paper can provide the information.

One interesting difference with Azo is that the highlights on the Kentmere feel like they dry UP a little bit rather than drying down.

Cheers, James

Hi James,

Thanks for checking. I will try Freestyle and see if they can direct us to a site for the curves and speed information.

Best,
Don

Donald Miller · Nov 15, 2005

doughowk said:
I just tried contact printing Kentmere Bromide with good results. My densest 8X10 neg required 60 sec @ f/8 under enlarger. The same neg requires 30 sec under 75w bulb for grade 2 AZO. I'll have to show the prints to our local AZO guru to see what he thinks of the Kentmere vs AZO. I do think it would be difficult to print the Kentmere under a bulb since it is so much faster.

Doug,

What is your impression of the paper when compared to Azo or any other paper for that matter. Thanks.

doughowk · Nov 16, 2005

Put a contact print in the critique gallery (Angel with Book). Paper's larger grain structure should lend itself to higher local contrast & acutance, as compared to AZO. As general purpose enlarging paper, Kentmere Bromide has replaced my use of Oriental Seagul; and grade 2 provides sufficient contrast for most of my negs.

jp80874 · Mar 4, 2006

James M. Bleifus said:
I think it's always important to remember that there is no such thing as the "best" paper, developer, etc. I was having a hard time getting my Azo prints to come to life (MAS described most of my prints as being too gray) and, last night, printed some problem negs with Kentmere Bromide and Amidol and had no problem bringing them to life. Not only did the Amidol give rich, rich blacks but also allowed for a water bath to control the contrast. The prints were so easy to make that I couldn't believe it. Zone zero has never been this easy before. The Kentmere blacks remind me of the old Oriental Seagull of the early '80s.

Does that mean that Kentmere Bromide is better than Azo? Not to me. It does mean that the Bromide/Amidol combination fits better with my vision, the way I shoot, my materials and the manner in which I develop film right now.

So definitely try the Azo but also try the Kentmere and decide which works best for you.

Cheers, James

James,

I have been enlarging 8x10 negatives to 16x20 with Kentmere Fineprint and Ilford Multigrade. I would like to try Kentmere Bromide with Amidol as you suggest. What formula are you using? I notice Photographer's Formulary sells Michael Smith's formula in kits. Is this what you suggest or some other mix?

Thanks,

John Powers

Mark Layne · Mar 7, 2006

juan said:
I haven't used the paper either (yet) but I have seen some of Doug's prints made on it. They remind me most of the prints I made on Zone VI Brilliant - the second edition made when Fred still owned the company. That was a bromide paper, too. The Kentmere seems to have the same contrast and print color - that's to my eye, no measurements.

Doug and I are giving a mini-seminar on contact printing next week, so maybe I can talk him out of a little of his paper. I may even mix up some of my dwindling supply of Amidol.
juan

As far as I know the second incarnation of Zone VI Brilliant after GB&Cie went out of business was Kentmere.
Mark

Mark Layne · Mar 7, 2006

Donald Miller said:
That would be pretty near that of grade three Azo...I got a 1.35 on that paper.

Bear in mind that British Grade 2 is more like 2.5 US. Grade 2 Kentona (one of the best WT papers around) certainly shows this
Mark

Alex Hawley · Mar 7, 2006

lee said:
why not print this paper with the light from an enlarger lamp?
lee\c

Throwing my two centavos into the the ring; I've tried Kentmere G2 and G3 using my enlarger as the light source. Works great as far as my eyes can see. So far I've used PPPD for developer which is as near to amidol as it gets without using amidol. Comparing a Kentmere Grade 2/PPPD print to an Azo Grade2/amidol print I made two years ago (same negative), there is hardly a difference. Only a slight, very slight difference in tones, the Kentemere print being just a tad bit warmer. Blacks are very rich and deep, whites can pop.

Tried a water bath experiment with grade 3 and was able to drag it down to Grade 2 with no problem. Conversely, by reducing exposure and increasing development, I could increase contrast on Grade 2 (works with Azo too). Bottom line is, I like it.

doughowk · Mar 8, 2006

I've used Formulary's BW-65 (which probably contains metol & hydroquinone combination) and Ilford's new CoolTone developer (primarily hydroquinone) with similiar results on Kentmere Bromide - deep blacks, clear whites & very good local contrast and detail.

Wayne · Mar 8, 2006

doughowk said:
I've used Formulary's BW-65 (which probably contains metol & hydroquinone combination) and Ilford's new CoolTone developer (primarily hydroquinone) with similiar results on Kentmere Bromide - deep blacks, clear whites & very good local contrast and detail.

Just for the record, BW-65 contains phenidone, glycin and hydroquinone. Lovely stuff, except for the tray life.

Kentmere Bromide users?

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency