Max contrast--different brand of paper, or different developer?

Help, please! I have a negative that I tested on 5x7 RC paper months ago (I think it was probably Ilford MGIV), and it needed a #5 filter. I'm now trying to print it onto 11x14 FB VC paper and not able to achieve anywhere close to the right contrast. The paper is old, although I don't remember exactly how old (it was already old when I purchased it but then stored for 8 years). All of it was sealed. The Adox MCC 110 had a grey cast, AND using #5 filter was giving more like #3 results. Tried Forte Polywarmtone, and prints that were OK with #4 filters on the 5x7 RC needed #5 to approximate the look, but not perfectly. Gave Ilford Warmtone a shot--I was assuming that was the "youngest" paper because I'm sure I'd bought that in person, while the others were bought off ebay. Same deal, used #5 filter on what was previously a #4 filter print on RC, and it still wasn't quite right.

I also tried some graded papers I had. Also very old. The Classic Nuance (I think that's the same as MCC) at grade 3 was pretty great (but not all my shots work at that grade). Emaks Fotokemika at grade 4...contrast is good, but there's some bizarre damage to the emulsion that I can't quite describe. So it's still unusable. And actually, I was getting good contrast on something that I definitely printed at at #3.5 on RC.

I've been trying to use this old paper I have stored because, well, I already own it and new paper is quite expensive. Before I run out to buy new paper, I'm wondering:

1) Is this problem entirely due to the indeterminate age of my paper, and all I need is new paper of any type?
2) Is the problem that FB will never be as "punchy" as RC? (I hate using this word, as the end result is definitely not an extreme stark contrasty print, but I still need that #5 filter).
3) Is the problem that scaling up to 11x14 from 5x7 requires increased contrast to match, and thus I simply won't be able to recreate the effect on 11x14? (I might cry, if so).
4) OR...the actual title of my post. Are some multigrade papers more contrasty than others, or some developers? I know some developers can soften contrast, but of course I need the opposite. I was using Dektol 1:2 the past few days, but I also have some Ilford Multigrade. I know these are both very all-purpose options.

Sorry so long, just wanted to explain!

Take a trip to B&H and buy some fresh stuff!

1. Most likely, yes. I have used paper that was less than 10 years old and got very inconsistent results. Anything with a grey cast is not going to be satisfactory. The only way to get consistent results is to use relatively fresh paper, within a few years of purchase date. Arista and Kentmere papers are very reasonably-priced and are good quality. Fresh developer is also important. Anything else is going to be a gamble. There may be some brands out there that age better than others.
2. I have found that I get reasonably close results between Ilford Multigrade RC and FB papers, but the current FB stock seems to be about a half-grade softer to my eye. The type of enlarger you use may make more of a difference. A print I made at grade 2 with a condenser enlarger usually requires a 2.5 or 3 filter to get the same look with a diffusion enlarger.
3. No. I've never had to change filtration when scaling up to larger prints. Just more exposure time.
4. There will be some difference between brands of variable-contrast paper, but most of the common neutral-tone papers like Ilford, Kentmere, Foma and Arista will give fairly similar results. There will be differences between warmtone, cooltone and neutral papers, so don't expect to get the same results if you're switching between these. The type of finish you choose (glossy, pearl, matte) will also make a difference. I get fairly similar results with Kentmere VC RC Lustre and Ilford MG RC Pearl papers. Common Paper Developers will not have nearly as much an effect on your final result as if you had used a different developer for the film itself. I use Ilford Multigrade and PQ Universal developers and don't see much difference.

If you're buying different types of old paper on eBay, you're never going to get predictable results. Storage conditions for paper are very important, and if paper (like film) is stored in hot or humid conditions it will deteriorate much quicker. Manufacturers also change their formulations over the years. Trying to compare results from old graded papers to current MG papers is even more pointless.

Pat Erson said:

Take a trip to B&H and buy some fresh stuff!

Click to expand...

+1

naugastyle said:

Help, please! I have a negative that I tested on 5x7 RC paper months ago (I think it was probably Ilford MGIV), and it needed a #5 filter... Gave Ilford Warmtone a shot--I was assuming that was the "youngest" paper because I'm sure I'd bought that in person, while the others were bought off ebay. Same deal, used #5 filter on what was previously a #4 filter print on RC, and it still wasn't quite right....

4) OR...the actual title of my post. Are some multigrade papers more contrasty than others, or some developers? I know some developers can soften contrast, but of course I need the opposite. I was using Dektol 1:2 the past few days, but I also have some Ilford Multigrade. I know these are both very all-purpose options.

Sorry so long, just wanted to explain!

Click to expand...

As others have already said, old paper loses some contrast and can behave quite differently compared to fresh paper. Now, regarding question #4, here's a tip that could save you some time experimenting, plus some paper: You need to find the manufacturer's datasheets for the papers you'd like to check. The one for Ilford MG IV RC is here and for the Warmtone FB here. There's an awful lot of information there, but what you're interested in is the ISO Range of the paper when using various filters. You'd notice that the RC paper has an ISO Range of 50 and 40 with #4 and #5 filters respectively, while the warmtone FB has 70 and 50. So, what do these numbers mean you say? Without getting too technical, the smaller the number, the higher the contrast. And we can conclude that
a) The RC paper has more contrast
b) The FB with a #5 filter is equivalent to the RC with a #4 filter, in terms of contrast.

Hope it helps.

Thanks so much, guys. Was a little faint at seeing prices for new paper, but it clearly needs to be done. When I scored 8 packs of 11x14 PWT for $100 way back when I should've considered that it wouldn't last forever! Truthfully I didn't really want warmtones on this particular set of prints, this is just what I had lying around, so I guess that's another push to get more paper.

Anon Ymous said:

You need to find the manufacturer's datasheets for the papers you'd like to check....Without getting too technical, the smaller the number, the higher the contrast. And we can conclude that
a) The RC paper has more contrast
b) The FB with a #5 filter is equivalent to the RC with a #4 filter, in terms of contrast.

Hope it helps.

Click to expand...

Yes, I honestly hadn't thought to look at it that way. Thank you!

hey nancy
great to see you here again !
what print developer are you using ?
you might be able to increase your paper contrast a little
by un-diluting your developer ( using it closer to or as "stock" )
try taking a scrap of your old paper and putting it in the developer with the lights on
to see what sort of contrast you get with less dilute developer, it might save you $$ on new paper.
btw your website and online portfolio pieces are still fantastic !

have fun!
john

In my experience, and this is generalizing the heck out of things, different papers have different shelf life. The old Ilford MG Rapid papers with developer incorporated don't last long before or after processing. The paper substrate on at least one batch I bought has turned beige with age. And as a general rule, MG papers don't last as long as graded papers, they still work but most lose contrast with age.

When the negative is pretty soft, you could also tone the negative with selenium toner. This will increase the contrast with about 1 grade. But be aware that the process is irreversible.

Just for future reference, buying old paper may seem like a good deal, but it really isn't. The most I would pay for old paper would be around 10% of what new paper would cost. Most old paper consumes time testing, and making multiple prints just to get something workable, as well as additives to the developer that slow development and make it useless for fresh paper. You can find good old paper, but really, it just isn't worth it. Time is more valuable.

If you are trying to save a few bucks, Arista paper from Freestyle, or Adorama's paper are good choices.

Developer composition has only a limited effect on paper contrast. In other words you cannot convert a grade 3 paper into a grade 5 paper by changing developers. What you can get is 1/2 to 2/3 grade more contrast.