Legendary Qualities of Discontinued Papers

AgX · Oct 19, 2007

phfitz said:
Did I just read somewhere that AGFA has a new B&W paper with a Dmax past 2.30 ?

Most probably Agfa does not produce any kind of paper anymore though they still offer such.
You probably stumbled over a new paper made by Fotoimpex resembling the Agfa MCC.

Photo Engineer · Oct 19, 2007

It will be very difficult to get a dmax in paper beyond 2.2 due to the laws of physics. Agfa, at one time, used silicate materials in the overcoat which did allow a dmax of 3.0, but the result was variable and could vanish with keeping due to humidity and other factors.

This method was discontinued.

PE

PHOTOTONE · Oct 19, 2007

Photo Engineer said:
It will be very difficult to get a dmax in paper beyond 2.2 due to the laws of physics. Agfa, at one time, used silicate materials in the overcoat which did allow a dmax of 3.0, but the result was variable and could vanish with keeping due to humidity and other factors.

This method was discontinued.

PE

Would that be the "Gevaluxe" paper being discussed on another thread?

Photo Engineer · Oct 19, 2007

IDK. This method was used in papers in the 60s, and was discontinued due to problems.

PE

dpurdy · Oct 19, 2007

I don't know what cadmium did for papers but the early 80s Portriga (before enviromental standards forced them to remove it) was a great paper. It had surface flexibility in that you could vary the degree of gloss. It responded to different developers way way more than current papers do. Using it with Amidol gave luminous glowing prints you can not get today. And papers of today are really difficult/impossible to print deep long scale prints that don't look ugly and muddy by comparison.

When Agfa gave notice of the "New and Improved" Portriga in the mid 80s and I gave a box a try, I nearly started crying in the darkroom. That is why I switched to platinum/palladium.

In the 70s at photo school I was forced to use Ektalure K. I still don't know why. To me it was a waste of time.

On the other hand the film of today is much better. IMO.

Photo Engineer · Oct 19, 2007

Cadmium had one major purpose in paper emulsions. It controlled the toe contrast (and to some extent the shoulder). Thats about it. Other chemicals in the emulsion controlled the tone of the developed silver.

Examples of the latter were Lead, Copper, Mercury salts and organic compounds such as benzotriazole.

PE

hypogimp · Oct 19, 2007

One paper that I used extensively before it went away was the original Oriental Seagull (Ansel Adams also used it). I then switched to Kodak Polymax Fine Art which has also gone away. I still have a box of 16x20 Oriental Seagull that went out of date in the early 1980s. I think that I will cut one sheet into four 8x10's and see if I can still use it.

Stephen Frizza · Feb 27, 2008

Does Anyone here remeber Kodak Silk black and White FB paper? Sadly it was virtually gone before I was born, but I've always had a love for this paper and collect images printed on it.
Is there a paper which has this same texture?

~steve

David Grenet · Feb 27, 2008

Now Steve, if you'll just be patient I'll have some Slavich Bromportrait paper in silk in about a week and I'll bring some over for you...

If you want to coat your own then you could always try some of the inkjet paper available in 'silk' - don't know how close it is to the old Kodak stuff though...

Paul Verizzo · Feb 27, 2008

Sample Book

Photo Engineer said:
At one time, Azo paper was sold in 19 surfaces of paper finish. That does not include contrast grades.

George Eastman House has informaiton on all of them.

I have a booklet with sample prints from lots of old time Kodak papers.

PE

I, too, have one of those booklets with a looseleaf type of snap connector at the top. I don't know when it was made, fifties probably judging by styles and items.

The types of papers and finishes that were available want to make me cry, and they were so beautiful.

I wish paper companies would mail out finish samples. Sure, everyone knows what glossy (F) is, but after that it is all semantics. And for example, someone here just recently noted that Foma "semi-matte" is "as matte can be."

Does anyone have a source for Kodak Translite? It was a thin, translucent paper for transmitted light images.

nworth · Feb 28, 2008

Stephen Frizza said:
Does Anyone here remeber Kodak Silk black and White FB paper? Sadly it was virtually gone before I was born, but I've always had a love for this paper and collect images printed on it.
Is there a paper which has this same texture?

~steve

That was the Y surface (cream white, luster, silk). It has quite a history, and it reappeared many times with various emulsions - most notably Opal and Medalist. It was a favorite for wedding photographs for many years. For a short time, a color negative version was also made. The surface was actually pretty rough, with sharp, prismatic facets. I'm not sure what the Slavich product looks like, but there is probably at least a small market for a surface like that. (As heresy, I'll even suggest it might be a good surface for digital printing, if anyone made such a digital priniting paper.)

nworth · Feb 28, 2008

Photo Engineer said:
It will be very difficult to get a dmax in paper beyond 2.2 due to the laws of physics. Agfa, at one time, used silicate materials in the overcoat which did allow a dmax of 3.0, but the result was variable and could vanish with keeping due to humidity and other factors.

This method was discontinued.

PE

I think people make too much of Dmax for papers. I understand their idea - it should give a more subtle range of shadows and a greater dynamic range. But it doesn't always work that way. The visual impression of a print depends on many factors, and good shadows are more often a matter of balance than of a high Dmax. Kodak papers rarely achieved a Dmax of greater than 1.7, but the blacks still looked quite black. Some others got up to 2.2 but the shadow areas didn't look as good. I was surprised when I measured step tablets on various papers and compared them with the best prints I could make on the same papers.

panchro-press · Feb 28, 2008

Whenever I see these discussions on photographic papers, I never see the paper I used to like: Kodak Velox. I guess it was aimed primarily at the amateur market; but it could hold its own against Azo and the contact papers of Defender and Ansco.
Speaking of old papers, does anybody remember the Sears photo-paper? It might have been called 'Tower'.

Dave

Photo Engineer · Feb 28, 2008

Velox, Velite and Azo all belonged to the same 'family' of emulsion types. I do remember Tower products as well.

PE

papermaker · Feb 28, 2008

Paul Verizzo said:
I, too, have one of those booklets with a looseleaf type of snap connector at the top. I don't know when it was made, fifties probably judging by styles and items.

The types of papers and finishes that were available want to make me cry, and they were so beautiful.

I wish paper companies would mail out finish samples. Sure, everyone knows what glossy (F) is, but after that it is all semantics. And for example, someone here just recently noted that Foma "semi-matte" is "as matte can be."

Does anyone have a source for Kodak Translite? It was a thin, translucent paper for transmitted light images.

Paul,

I might be able to help you date your sample book. I wouldn't need to see it but would need to know what paper samples are in it. If you are interested you can contact me at kitfunderburk@gmail.com.

papermaker · Feb 28, 2008

nworth said:
That was the Y surface (cream white, luster, silk). It has quite a history, and it reappeared many times with various emulsions - most notably Opal and Medalist. It was a favorite for wedding photographs for many years. For a short time, a color negative version was also made. The surface was actually pretty rough, with sharp, prismatic facets. I'm not sure what the Slavich product looks like, but there is probably at least a small market for a surface like that. (As heresy, I'll even suggest it might be a good surface for digital printing, if anyone made such a digital priniting paper.)

The Kodak silk surface fiber based papers were introduced in the early 1930's on at least two papers -- Vitava Athena and Vitava Projection papers in two surfaces -- X: Silk, Semi-matte, Ivory and Y: Silk, Semi-matte, Cream White. By the late 40's, the ivory tinted paper had been discontinued and the gloss designation had been changed to lustre. By that time silk surface had been added for Opal, Platino, and Illustrator's Azo papers and later expanded to other papers as you noted. Fiber based silk paper was discontinued in the late 1970's.

richard ide · Feb 28, 2008

Paul,

Translite was a unique product. Today, I think the closest you can get is Kodak Duratrans colour material. Not as translucent but careful filtration when exposing will give a good rich black and a clean white background. As far as availability try to buy a few feet off a roll from a professional lab near you. I used to use Dupont Cronapaque which was similar to Duratrans as far as opacity with excellent results.

mark · Feb 28, 2008

When I was taking a photo class a local photog who was going totally Pt/Pd donated his tock of old papers to the class I was in. I think the man was looking for the magic bullet because every make and grade was represented. It was like looking at the shelves in a photo store. The papers sat and sat. No one used any of them. I liked my Brilliant paper, but ran out one night. So, not realizing that most of the papers were discontinued, began a search through the box. I tried every paper with the same negative, and was looking something that selenium toned well.

At the bottom of the box was some old Oriental grade 3. Three 25 sheet packets of 8x10. After using one sheet I was completey sold.

Photo Engineer · Feb 28, 2008

In my many years in photography, I have seen many photographers spend their entire lives seeking the 'magic bullet' in paper, developer and fixers. They never get a print that looks 'just right' and so change one of the 3 and of course this includes the film as well.

This ends up as a neverending search for the "holy grail" of photography and a nostalgic look back to "what we used to have would solve my problem". Kit and I have talked about this a few times, and I think I have to say that many of the tones can be achived by coffee, tea, sepia toner and etc. Even soaking paper in dlute dyes will give tones of once vanished supports.

As for surfaces, well that is a problem but right now I can coat on at least 7 surfaces that approximate the look of days gone by. So, there are ways to get there from here, but is it a real goal or the holy grail, something that is never found. (BTW, if you don't want to make your own emulsion get Liquid Light or the equivalent and coat on a Watercolor or Suede paper to get a superb finish)

Will your pictures suddenly be prizewinners if you could print them on Velour surface Medalist or whatever? Think about it. I have rarely seen this to be the case.

PE

mark · Feb 28, 2008

PE,

No one is saying their images will insantly become better, they are saying they liked the paper. I liked the feel of my first girl friend, and, while I would not give up my wife for anything, those memories come back and make me smile.

Photo Engineer · Feb 28, 2008

I said "many" not all.

Some go back to their old GF.

PE

mark · Feb 28, 2008

Not me. The memory is much better than the present reality. Two ex-husbands (Both of the men got the kids), alcoholic, and mean as a badger.

athanasius80 · Feb 29, 2008

And some of us like the look of 50 year old prints they find made on now discontinued paper. I'd love some Kodak Opal!

WarEaglemtn · Mar 21, 2008

I have to disagree with some that 'todays papers are just as good'.

The older papers with Cadmium had a look we can't match with the papers today. Forte warmtone with cadmium looked like fine tanned leather in its coloration. Just can't get it today with modern papers... or, if Roger and others know how let the secret out so we can reproduce some of our older prints once again.

Ilford makes some nice papers but their toning ability and speed has a lot of room for improvement.

I am still looking for a solid replacement for forte Polygrade V and Agfa Brovira 111.

Photo Engineer · Mar 21, 2008

WarEaglemtn said:
I have to disagree with some that 'todays papers are just as good'.

The older papers with Cadmium had a look we can't match with the papers today. Forte warmtone with cadmium looked like fine tanned leather in its coloration. Just can't get it today with modern papers... or, if Roger and others know how let the secret out so we can reproduce some of our older prints once again.

Ilford makes some nice papers but their toning ability and speed has a lot of room for improvement.

I am still looking for a solid replacement for forte Polygrade V and Agfa Brovira 111.

I think that this is mainly due to the fact that none of todays papers contain the wonderful pigments that these old papers contained. All modern supports are on unpigmented support and many contain fluorescent dyes to improve 'whiteness'.

PE

Legendary Qualities of Discontinued Papers

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency