No Developer - No Image - No Surprise

[dancqu]

I conducted real world tests of Kentmere Fineprint and
Forte Polywarmtone. The tests were to confirm that
neither had developer incorporated emulsions; DI
emulsions. DI insofar as they might even to the
very least extent affect a prints outcome.

The two papers were exposed using a step tablet
to values known to produce a full gray scale when
processed in a known print developer. The papers
were developed in a carbonated only solution.
Neither paper produced even a hint of the
gray scale.

I know there are other concerns with DI emulsions
but insofar as their having any effect upon the image
produced with the above two papers, there is None.
I doubt there are any papers we use which would
not pass the above test. Dan

 

[Donald Qualls]

If you want to be really sure, try again with a 2% sodium hydroxide solution.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Dan, I have three points.

1. Some DI papers don't respond to carbonate solutions, only hydroxide solutions. This is due to the weak nature of some of the incorporated developers or their solubility in alkali.

2. Ilford MGIV paper, a paper that we all probably use, fails a test with NaOH turning dark grey at the maxiumum exposure. It might fail your test, but it is a DI paper.

3. Even passing the test you describe does not mean that the incorporated developer is not present or not active in the carbonate solution. It may cross oxidize with normal developing agents in solution and thereby become what we call an 'eta' (electron transfer agent). Failing the test does not mean that the developing agent plays a significant part in imaging either. It may just accelerate normal development or tweak curve shape.

PE

 

[Petzi]

I think it is time to compile a list of papers which contain developer, and papers that don't.

 

[chiller]

I think it is time to compile a list of papers which contain developer, and papers that don't.

That is a very good suggestion.