Old Paper Again

[Rlibersky]

All all this talk of printing on old paper and no one has shown anything. I do what I can here. These scans aren't quite as nice as the original. I only retouched brightness after scanning.

Ok here it goes first contact sheet of a step guide

All prints are developed in Defender 58D 1:1

If people are interested I will post times for exposure. Development was 4-6 minutes. Exposure 90 to 270 seconds. The Opal was in an enlarger everything else contact.

Order of paper Opal 1949, Illingworth ?, Velox 1954, Azo 1931
I will post some more pictures later.

 

[Rlibersky]

Here are some pictures

1. Azo 1931
2. Luminos 1974 (I think the date is accurate)
3. Opal1949 - Scan seems to have more color then the original. All Brown in
my print.
4. Velox 1947
5. Opal1947
6. Velox 1954
7. Velox 1974

I have to size a number of scan of other papers. When I get a chance I will. Those will be of the same negative on different paper.

 

[Cor]

Here are some pictures

1. Azo 1931
2. Luminos 1974 (I think the date is accurate)
3. Opal1949 - Scan seems to have more color then the original. All Brown in
my print.
4. Velox 1947
5. Opal1947
6. Velox 1954
7. Velox 1974

I have to size a number of scan of other papers. When I get a chance I will. Those will be of the same negative on different paper.

..very nice and interesting! Thanks a bunch for posting!

Best,

Cor

 

[sun of sand]

I like the Opal. That looks fantastic! I have a little 70's. Box sold for pennies couple weeks ago that must have been from the 40's.
Neat stuff.
How do you read the tablet? What kind of info does it give?
Illingworth looks the worst?
Opal looks smoother than Velox and less biting ..a better portrait paper?
Why does the Azo seem to have so little in the blacks? More in the midtones? Most contrast? Very subtle gradation.
The velox/azo scans don't seem to match in color to their tablets.
Velox came out olive/sepia and cold. Opal matches in both. Azo is completely opposite.

I wouldn't hesitate to use any of that paper ..even with the difficulties. The Opal is more my style, though.
don'tcarefortheLuminous.


"...same negative on different paper" Great


Any antifoggant added? Which one took the 5 minute exposure? I have some 70's Polylure that is fogged a bit but with 4 minutes at
f5.6 -contact print- it comes out fine. Must have been stored in the oven. I thought Polylure would have been a close cousin to Ektalure but on one of the sites dealing with old paper it was classed a SLOWER chlorobromide than Ektalure. I've seen a lot of conflicting classification. Read it's variable contrast from grades 2-3.5, or something, too.

 

[Snapshot]

Thanks for posting the comparison.

 

[jgjbowen]

Order of paper Opal 1949, Illingworth ?, Velox 1954, Azo 1931
I will post some more pictures later.

Robert,

Thanks. the file names would have me believe the papers are (in order) Opal, Illingworth, Azo 1931 then Velox 1937.

In other words the file names don't match the order you stated in your post.

Thanks again. I can't wait to see all the papers printed with the same negative.

 

[Rlibersky]

Robert,

Thanks. the file names would have me believe the papers are (in order) Opal, Illingworth, Azo 1931 then Velox 1937.

In other words the file names don't match the order you stated in your post.

Thanks again. I can't wait to see all the papers printed with the same negative.

Oops the the file names are correct in the step wedge area. My understanding of the step wedge is limited. I believe this one is in 1/2 stop increments and 11 is zone 5. Someone more familiar with this wedge would be better choice for explanation. I used it to show the range of the paper. Of the 4 shown the Illingsworth's range goes across the whole wedge. Quite impressive really. It did have the most fog, I don't know if this had anything to do with it.

My goal was to have the range in the middle assuming that it could be moved up or down the scale.

The 4 wedges were all processed in 58D the color is the combination of paper and developer. Al were Selenium toned. the prints are form different developers. The brownish tone ones are 58D and the Olive or black tone ones are LPD 1:5 with 50ml of Benzotriazole per 1000ml added. The LPD works well with contact paper not to good with enlarging paper

I would be interested to see other old papers from this group if anybody has some.

Randy

 

[mwdake]

I love the looks of # 1 and # 5.

Nice work, thanks.

 

[Photo Engineer]

The hues and color shifts are unreal. I never saw Opal, Azo or Velox give those kinds of neutral scales. I could believe the tone to some extent, but the hue shifts for a B&W paper are too too extreme.

PE

 

[Rlibersky]

The hues and color shifts are unreal. I never saw Opal, Azo or Velox give those kinds of neutral scales. I could believe the tone to some extent, but the hue shifts for a B&W paper are too too extreme.

PE

That probaly has more to do with my scanning abilities and computer setup. I was afraid to mess with the scans to much. That said when toning a different piece of the 1931 Azo it went almost red using a 1:20 Selinium mix.

 

[jgjbowen]

The photo of the lady sitting on the bench, Velox 1954, certainly has that "3D effect"....at least on my monitor it does.

 

[Photo Engineer]

That probaly has more to do with my scanning abilities and computer setup. I was afraid to mess with the scans to much. That said when toning a different piece of the 1931 Azo it went almost red using a 1:20 Selinium mix.

Were all of them toned then in the original scans?

That is not clear, and is not a very good comparison of the real image tone of the papers themselves.

PE

 

[Rlibersky]

PE, if you look at the lower end of the scale that is the color that is closest to the original. My monitor here at work shows more tone then my monitor at home. When I scanned them in I wanted to show the tone so I scanned them as color. The range on the wedge is accurate.

I will rescan them tonight and see if I can get a better representation.

 

[Photo Engineer]

I'm just curious to find out if they were all toned in the first post.

This makes a big difference in those papers when compared to the untoned image. This again is different than modern papers due to the use of different addenda today.

PE

 

[Rlibersky]

I'm just curious to find out if they were all toned in the first post.

This makes a big difference in those papers when compared to the untoned image. This again is different than modern papers due to the use of different addenda today.

PE

Oh I miss understood what you where asking. I did tone them in Selinium at 1:60 for 5 mins.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Ok, due to the spread in halide content and addenda compared to modern papers, the Se toning will distort them from the original. Remember that toning was not the norm back then among the average photographer. Therefore, the image tone was often adjusted for a straight process, and toning offset this quite a bit.

You might do a set without toning. This would represent what most average guys got back then.

PE

 

[Rlibersky]

That is good information. I will try that next time.

 

[Rlibersky]

Here is a new scan of the step wedges from the opening post. They more reflect the tone of the originals.

All were develored in 58D except for Illingsworth witch was LPD 1:3 50ml of 1% sol. Benzotriazole.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Well, I'll give a guess here that we are looking at Opal, Velox and Azo as being a halide and/or addenda series that shifts from brown, to purpule to yellowish (on my monitor), and without the toner, these variations would be very very subdued and maybe even reversed in order.

PE

 

[Rlibersky]

Well, I'll give a guess here that we are looking at Opal, Velox and Azo as being a halide and/or addenda series that shifts from brown, to purpule to yellowish (on my monitor), and without the toner, these variations would be very very subdued and maybe even reversed in order.

PE

Please excuse my ignorence. Can you explain "as being a halide and/or addnda series" I do not know what you are trying to say.

I do have a dual monitor set up and they look different on each. No yellow though.

randy

 

[Photo Engineer]

Ok, Opal is an enlarging paper made from a Silver Chloro-Bromide emulsion, probably high bromide, Velox is a Chloro-Bromide with high chloride, I would guess, and Azo is a pure Chloride emulsion for contact printing. The first two in the early days, contained Cadmium and/or Mercury salts to control curve shape and tone. Azo used another method.

PE

 

[Rlibersky]

Here are some prints printed on the same paper. All enlarging Defender 58D. Nothing scientific here just shows a print can be made on old paper.

 

[jgjbowen]

Robert,

Are all of these on the same paper grade? I ask because the cykora portrait seems to have much more contrast than the portrait proof.

Thanks for the images.

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

Randy, thanks for sharing these results. I have actually seen all of these in real life, and the variations in surface texture was quite tangible. What really struck me was how fog free these older papers printed.
Randy has been very kind in mixing me a couple of batches of the 58-D formula that I intent to try on some really old Velox (I've got 700+ sheets that expired in 1947) and some Agfa Portriga Rapid G2 and 3 from the 1980s that fog very badly in Ansco-130 glycin developer (although it works with lith chemistry, and beautifully so).

Another highlight is how beautiful some of those old papers are. Man, I live in the wrong decade. Although printers back then would probably be excited about some of the papers available to me... That whole thing with grass and how it's greener on the other side... Whatever enables us to make nice prints like these is definitely worthwhile.

Thanks for sharing your results, Randy!

- Thomas

 

[Rlibersky]

Thanks for the nice words Thomas. I will have to go look on the grade of the paper. If I remember correctly, and I wouldn't bet on it, these are on grade 2 and grade 3. I don't know which is which though. I have found that what I expect to be a grade 2 can be quite different in this old paper. I figured some was due to age and some to the fact that brighteners were not used in the paper so the white are not as white as is expected today.