Kodalith Fine Line developer

[Mike Té]

Hi.

I'm preparing to attempt my first lith prints. I have a couple of packages of Kodalith Fine Line developer from who-knows-when, A and B in powdered form.

Is this a product that will work?

I'm reading through Tim Rudman's 2 books again (already read them once cover to cover); he mentions Kodalith Super RT among other brands.

Cheers.

 

[richard ide]

Hi
It should work. Originally it was intended to enhance the adjacency effect by not agitating the developer/film once the image appeared on lith film. Be advised it has a very short tray life when A & B are mixed. It was used for enhancing negative contrast of low contrast original documents.

 

[Mike Té]

Thanks, Richard.

I do have another question.

I don't have any of the "best" papers; I have some Forte Polygrade RC WT (semi-matt) for my first trial efforts. Would any of my other papers be worth trying out at another time?

-Ilford MG RC regular (glossy, pearl, semi-matt), WT (glossy, pearl, semi-matt), CT (pearl), portfolio
-Ilford MG FB regular
-Ilfobrom G3 FB Galerie
-Agfa Multicontrast glossy and semi-matt
-Forte Polygrade RC CT
-Cachet Multibrom VC-FB matt

Cheers from blowy-chilly Ottawa.

 

[richard ide]

Hi again
Sorry, I can't answer that. I have not tried lith printing with enlarging papers.

Nice weather we are having.

 

[lither]

AGFA MCC

I have had great success with AGFA MCC, with Lodalith RT and LD20

 

[lither]

oops

Of course I meant Kodalith

 

[Mark Layne]

Thanks, Richard.

I do have another question.

I don't have any of the "best" papers; I have some Forte Polygrade RC WT (semi-matt) for my first trial efforts. Would any of my other papers be worth trying out at another time?

-Ilford MG RC regular (glossy, pearl, semi-matt), WT (glossy, pearl, semi-matt), CT (pearl), portfolio
-Ilford MG FB regular
-Ilfobrom G3 FB Galerie
-Agfa Multicontrast glossy and semi-matt
-Forte Polygrade RC CT
-Cachet Multibrom VC-FB matt

Cheers from blowy-chilly Ottawa.

I agree with Richard's assessment that it was designed to copy originals of poor contrast as opposed to RT for high contrast graphic arts originals. I have a lot of it and have asked Tim Rudman and others about it. So far no one is familiar with it but I have too much of it to ignore. It does not give as colorful results as Champion Novalith for example but will give pink highlights on Polywarmtone grudgingly at 1+1+12.
I am unable so far to get salmon colour on Fomatone, but switching to a Formaldehyde developer at 1+1+40 gives easy pink colour.
I dont think any of the papers you list will give pinkish colours but nice browns should be obtainable.
Mark

 

[Mark Layne]

And would you Ottawa people kindly stop dumping your excess snow in my driveway!
Mark

 

[Mike Té]

And would you Ottawa people kindly stop dumping your excess snow in my driveway!
Mark

Ha! LOL. Minus 27 C here this morning, despite the warming effect of parliament.

Thanks for the answers, guys; quite specific and just what I was looking for.

I didn't get a chance to try printing last evening. All the preparatories kept me busy; change the safelight filter to red (probably not necessary for the Forte), FIND a couple of jugs that will hold a gallon each, find containers for the chemicals already in those jugs, wash, mix, pour, wash, the usual. Enlarger and negative set up. I finally got ready to print at about a quarter to 11 last evening and decided to wait; I'd not taken the Forte out of the fridge.

Back at it today.

Cheers.

 

[Mike Té]

Well, I got some printing done...

I actually managed to have some success...

Quite a variable process. I'm surprised.

I started with the Forte Polywarmtone RC papers and fond that the shadows printed very dark, leaving the midtones undeveloped. Colour was pretty black.

I had the best success with the Agfa MCC RC, to my surprise. Midtones showed up before shadows were too dense. Dark cocoa brown.

I tried Ilford RC WT last and the colour was promising, warmer with a slight pink tinge to the brown.

I was amazed at how variable the process was. A batch of developer (1+1+12) would do 2 or 3 prints, developing time getting markedly longer for each subsequent print in the same mix. To get through a dozen papers, I had to mix developer 4 times. 5 of those papers wouldn't proceed to complete development, stalling at about 8 minutes and remaining that way. The fastest development was in my last batch (1+1+1 of exhausted developer+10 water).

Nowhere did I see infectious development; no runaway trains. I was actually hoping to see it. I'll leave the last batch of developer out to see just how brown it gets...

I should be posting up my examples, but that would mean that I'd have to learn how to use the scanner tonight. I already have a brain cramp from speeding around those learning curves.

 

[tim rudman]

Hello Mike
I have not been online here much lately and just spotted your postings.
As Mark said, I haven't tried the dev you are using but it sounds like you would make life easier for yourself by getting the best ones for the job;-)
It always hepls and I'm all for making things easy, especially to begin with as this increases success and gives you confidence that you can do it.

Your Agfa paper will work, as will your Polygrade. I can't remember about Multibrom - its many years since I tested it, or used it at all for that matter. I remember testing it and as it didn't make it into the list in the first book I guess it wasn't amongst the best for this process.

There were up to date lists of papers and developers in 'WOLP' of course, but even since January there have been some changes to that list and you have reminded me to say that I plan to post an update to the mailing list members on my WOLP website shortly and will be running some new test as soon as I can get the time, so if you are on that list, keep your eyes peeled. Perhaps I should post a 'heads up' thread to that effect on APUG.

Meanwhile, from the results you are posting, remember that some papers are much more sensitive than others to both aged (partly used) developer and higher dilutions, both of which can give stronger colours and enhanced toneability.

best wishes
Tim

 

[Rich Ullsmith]

I've lithed the Galerie 3 and 4. Pink and brown. Both were old boxes though, so I don't know if the newer stuff will work.

Something to consider when playing with different papers: you can test them to see if they have an accelerator or developer in the emulsion by putting a few drops of B on a test strip, and see if it turns black. If it does, then it's not considered "lithable." What I don't know is, if you develop one of these papers, is there enough developer in the paper to diffuse out and kill the lith effect of your soup? I ask because I've had sessions where I'm trying several different papers, and then go to a paper that I know will lith, and it doesn't! (Color, but no lith effect.)

I'd love to hear an opinion on this. (Sorry Mike, don't mean to hijack yer thread.)

 

[Mike Té]

Thanks for the replies!

Now I really have to try and post up a couple examples... I'll try the scanner tomorrow (in the middle of a couple of night shifts just now).

Cheers.

 

[Mike Té]

Tim, I must apologize; I've stained your books. Nice pinks and salmons, though...

Cheers.

 

[tim rudman]

Tim, I must apologize; I've stained your books. Nice pinks and salmons, though...

Cheers.

That's OK. I didn't know they lithed ;-)
Tim