Multigrade grades

[Jack Lusted]

Hi,
I've just re-started doing darkroom work after nearly 30 years. The big change has been RC paper and multigrade. Now, when I did printing back in the 70's the usual grade paper was 2, 3 for a snap of hardness, 1 for soft. To use grade 4 or above was really quite rare. Now, however, using grade 4 filtration is quite usual - or at least it is with my negs. So have the grades dumbed down (so to speak) or are my negs softer?
I currently use FP4+ or Delta 400 in Ilfosol S, then it was FP4 or Plus X pan in Acutol.


Any ideas??

 

[David H. Bebbington]

Hi,
So have the grades dumbed down (so to speak) or are my negs softer?
QUOTE]
If you're using an enlarger with a dichroic filter head (color or multigrade), this will be softer than a condenser type. Also, Ilford Multigrade IV has, I believe, a pronounced shoulder to its characteristic curve which may make it appear softer. There's nothing "wrong" with always printing on grade 4, but if you feel there's a danger of running out of contrast, it might be advisable to increase film development times by 10% or so and see if the resulting negs are more comfortable to print.

Regards,

David

 

[Lee Shively]

Like you, I learned to print on graded paper. I always processed my film to be low contrast for printing on condenser enlargers and I used a grade 3 as my standard back then. These days, I have discovered my negatives print well on Ilford MG with no filters using a condenser enlarger. The paper is supposed to be grade 2 1/2 when used without a filter. That seems about right to me for my negatives.

You might want to try increasing the processing time of your negatives. But if you get good results printing with a #4 filter as standard, who's to say it's wrong?

 

[George Collier]

I know what you mean about feeling funny about using higher than 2 or 3 as normal. I have been printing since the early 60's (actually, late 50's, but don't tell), and my experience is, that somewhere in the mid to late 70's, the quality of paper began to pick up, starting with Ilford Gallerie, and my impression was that the range of tones a paper could reproduce increased (higher DMax?). Today there are many papers that far out-perform what I used in college in the early 70's, and maybe a by-product of the increase in range is to use a higher contrast, giving better local separation to adjacent tones, and an overall increase in contrast with no loss of detail at either end of the scale. I don't know if this makes sense, but your question got me thinking.

 

[Bill Dobbs]

Only to add my observations and to concur with original post. I've just used up all my old Ilford graded paper (#3). I have used it for contact prints because was not sure if it was fogged (after testing I concluded it may have been but only very slightly). Anyway, in comparing old graded paper to MG IV using #3 filter, I found the MG to have less contrast than the graded paper. Don't know why, but results speak for themselves.

 

[Dave Miller]

I’m using a Durst 1200 enlarger with a VLS501 multi-grade head. I understand that this is calibrated to Ilford multigrade paper. The white light setting coincides with grade 2 ¼.
Does this add to the discussion?

 

[dancqu]

Any ideas??

Sure, give graded multigrade a try. Fuji turns out
two grades of multigrade. Single grade multigrade
does not really deliver all those grades over the
entire range of densities. Check Ilford's paper
PDFs. Compare those curves with Ilford's
RC and FB Graded paper curves. Dan

 

[nworth]

Hi,
... So have the grades dumbed down (so to speak) or are my negs softer?
...

I've noticed that development recommendations 20 years ago produced negatives from the film of the time of about 0.65. Now it seems to be about 0.54, with fairly different films.

 

[Simon R Galley]

Dear Jack,

Pleased to have you 'back' after 30 years .......Please send your address to my personal e.mail and I will send you the MULTIGRADE printing manual, which should
resolve a few issues...

Simon@ILFORD / HARMAN technology Limited

 

[juanito]

I would try an increase of film developement by 15%.

 

[Donald Miller]

Hi,
I've just re-started doing darkroom work after nearly 30 years. The big change has been RC paper and multigrade. Now, when I did printing back in the 70's the usual grade paper was 2, 3 for a snap of hardness, 1 for soft. To use grade 4 or above was really quite rare. Now, however, using grade 4 filtration is quite usual - or at least it is with my negs. So have the grades dumbed down (so to speak) or are my negs softer?
I currently use FP4+ or Delta 400 in Ilfosol S, then it was FP4 or Plus X pan in Acutol.


Any ideas??

I noticed the same thing when I switched from graded to VC materials. In addition to the change of materials, I switched from a cold light head to a variable contrast diffusion head and later to a condenser light source. So I am not sure whether all of it was due to a change in materials or whether some of it had to do with other changes that I made.

The short of it is that negatives previously developed to print on a grade two graded paper with a cold light head, I now print on grade 2 1/2 or 3 with a condenser enlarger.

In my experience, based upon densitometric evaluation, the negative density range that Ansel Adams proposed in his book The Negative are no longer valid with todays materials.

The answer as others have mentioned is to develop the film longer.

Good to see you back to photography. Good luck.

 

[dancqu]

In my experience, based upon densitometric evaluation, the
negative density range that Ansel Adams proposed in his book
The Negative are no longer valid with todays materials.

And that applies to Graded? Or VC? Or both? Dan

 

[Donald Miller]

And that applies to Graded? Or VC? Or both? Dan

That applies to VC materials. I don't use graded paper any longer.

 

[Adrian Twiss]

Multigrade

I’m using a Durst 1200 enlarger with a VLS501 multi-grade head. I understand that this is calibrated to Ilford multigrade paper. The white light setting coincides with grade 2 ¼.
Does this add to the discussion?

Dave

Sorry to get a bit off the subject but where did you get your VLS501 head. I am looking for an alternative for my Multigraph head which I dont like in the least

 

[Dave Miller]

Where else - Ebay :rolleyes: