Oriental Seagull

[Wmcgowin]

I have always heard about Oriental Papers-how they were what Ansel Adams used, etc., etc. I personally have never used them. My experience (since getting back into this 18 months or so ago, after a long hiatus) has been exclusively with Ilford papers-with a brief detour into Foma papers. Twenty+ years ago, I used Kodak and Ilford papers.

I looked at the Oriental website, and they say their Seagull FB paper is "exactly" (their word, not mine) the same formula as what Ansel used. They also tout a much higher silver content in their papers than other papers out there. So I am wondering if I should look at it.

What experience has anyone else had with Oriental?

 

[reellis67]

I use various Ilford papers for everything, but I bought a 25 pack of Oriental VC FB just to see what it looked like, and I found the whites to be brighter than those of the MG FB paper using the same negative and developer. I haven't tried toning it yet (the main reason I got it) to compare MGIV, but I will be doing so shortly (I have one negative that I use with various paper/developer/toner combinations, each of which goes in a binder for future reference.) One other thing that I found is that the Oriental appears to be somewhat flatter than the MGIV prints before pressing. After a print is pressed for a day or two, they seem to be about the same though...

- Randy

 

[AllenR]

I have been using Oriental since it came out in, what, the mid-1980's. The paper they are making today, regardless of the advertising hype, does not behave the same as that first generation of papers, the ones is the blue boxes. I still use if for all of my work, and it is a very good paper. But, there are other very good papers on the market too. You just need to settle on one that meets your needs. If you like a neutral to cold-toned paper that selenium tones nicely, then Oriental might be of interest to you.

 

[don sigl]

Back when Oriental first came out, it really raised the bar. The stuff in the blue boxes was just spectacular. I really loved that paper. Then it went away, and I was devastated. Then it came back at twice the price (25 sheets were the price of the old 50 sheet boxes). I was disgusted.
I searched for something new.... I wanted something ...non Oriental. I tried a lot of papers, Agfa, Kodak, Luminos, Bergger, then Forte. The Fortezo was definitely new for me. The Fortezo and PWT papers were rich and warm without that weak off white base you usually find in warm toned papers. (I know, I know, a lot of people really like it, but I find it to be awful. Maybe just a permanent residual effect left in my psyche from the years submerged in Oriental).
Sure, I've been tempted...just casually browsing the paper section of the local pro shop or scanning pages online....It seems so easy, just a little taste, just....one box... 25 sheets, thats all. I can handle it. Those beautiful lush rich blacks and vibrant whites jumping out of the Amidol developer...the icy coolnes of it.... but then I come to my senses and go back to my wonderfully warm toned world. Beware, if you use the paper, you may become addicted to it.

Regards,

 

[Tom Stanworth]

Mixed. I dont know whether it is the same stuff as yesteryear but it still can be magnificent. I find it about a grade softer than Ilford MGIV but deeper and generally more impressive. I get the impression that a lot of the stock about is old, esp if had thru mr Cad. If I had dead flat negs this would not be my choice, bt for good contrasty negs it is beyond compare. The surface texture is spot on; glossy but not too shiny and way ahead of MG4 if you ask me. Still every now and again I find myself needing the extra contrast of the MCC/MgIV papers. MCC was a beaut, but MGIV pales next to seagul IMO.

Expensive, so buy on one of Mr Cads specials..buy one get one free. At 'normal price' it is too expensive.

 

[BBarlow690]

A few years ago, I tested papers and developers head-to-head. PDFs of the articles published in View Camera are available for free download at www.circleofthesunproductions.com. I tested Oriental graded and VC.

The PDFs include Part IV, never published, about Azo.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

I'm starting to suspect I got a bad batch, because the time I tested the "NEW" Oriental Seagull in the black-and-white packages, it was really flat - I think mine may have been fogged at the factory. I have since found Bergger as a replacement. I went through a round of testing papers not too long ago, because I was unhappy with Bergger (mostly for their pricing), and tried Kentmere and Foma as well. I liked Kentmere, but found in the long run it was just too contrasty. The Foma is very nice, and could be a worthwhile replacement for Bergger if it goes away. But, I ended up coming back to Bergger, specifically their warmtone VCCB variable contrast fiber paper. It tones better than just about anything else I've handled - from sepia to selenium and just about anything in between.

 

[SuzanneR]

I've recently tried the warm tone VC Oriental, and I really like it. Not as brown as Forte PWT, but I felt like the blacks (shadow) areas of my prints were somehow more lovely than the darks of Ilford WT. I feel like it's the closest thing I have found to replace Agfa. And it tones about like the ilford, slow and subtley, where I found the forte tones quickly, and can get a little too "pink" somehow in selenium.

It's very nice paper. Luckily there really are a lot of choices, and I find that I often let the "feel" of the image help me decide how warm I want to go.

With all that said, I haven't used the neutral tone version of this paper, but I'll bet it's nice!

 

[drpsilver]

23 Oct 2006

I will echo that the Oriental paper (in the blue box) is an outstanding paper. Rich blacks and great shadow detail from thin parts of a negative. The one disadvantage I have seen is that when toned with selenium (1:10) the print has a tendency to show some pink/purple tones.

I have a limited supply of this paper and use it only when an image "does not work" on Ilford MGIV (my normal paper).

Regards,
Darwin

 

[Cecil]

Oriental Seagull G graded

Oriental graded paper available today is a completely different paper.

I had been using the Oriental Seagull G graded paper until last year when they suddently replaced it with a completely different paper. They name the new paper GF intead of G, even though the major mail order retailers are still listing them as G. GF is a warm tone paper while G is cold to neutral tone.

All the G2 and G4 I bought prior to the change were fogged. G3 was okay and that was what I mostly used.

 

[Tom Stanworth]

From what I hear the new GF is nothing to write home about and the New VC isn't either. The stuff still carries the high price tag and so when my original G and VC is used I wont be buying any more. Fotospeed legacy is wonderful and just warm of neutral (like Agfa MCC) and forte polygrade for the cold paper. That will do me....along with polywarmtone is I want very warm results.

 

[Cecil]

Try J&C Nuance. I bet you will like it.

I tried J&C Nuance Hard (G3) and Kentmere Bromide G3 as a replacement to Oriental Seagull G3. The Kentmere is about half a grade more contracy. Nuance G3 seems to be similar in contrast to Oriental Seagull G3. So I have been using Nuance Hard. I am very happy with the result. I just hope it will be in stock soon. I am very grateful to J&C for importing such a good graded paper.

 

[George Collier]

I use an Aristo V54 cold light, and for many years used Seagull G series graded, which toned to a great eggplant color in selenium toner. However, I have started reprinting a lot of those images on Forte V Poly with filters, and I find the low value separation, and the overall scale quality to be much better with the Forte. It may be because of better contrast control with the filters, but I no longer use Seagull. I tried the Seagull VC version (all these papers are fiber) but it didn't tone as well (confirmed by Seagull technical support). I may not have given the Seagull VC enough of a chance, but I couldn't keep testing forever, and I liked the Forte right away.

 

[Tom Stanworth]

I tried J&C Nuance Hard (G3) and Kentmere Bromide G3 as a replacement to Oriental Seagull G3. The Kentmere is about half a grade more contracy. Nuance G3 seems to be similar in contrast to Oriental Seagull G3. So I have been using Nuance Hard. I am very happy with the result. I just hope it will be in stock soon. I am very grateful to J&C for importing such a good graded paper.

I have sone Zone VI graded paper (forget the name) and the label says made in UK. I am sure this is Kentmere too (asked on some forums and this was the consensus). Very nice paper indeed and farmore contrast than Seagul by at least a grade. I have G2 and did a direct comparison with Seagul. The OS3 was less contrasty and the OS G4 a touch more contrasty. nuts!

I think seagul wont have good fortunes. They are trading on an old reputation and the new paper (GF and New VC) is ridiculously over priced for a paper which is not better than (and perhaps worse than) the current front runners.

Altho Fotospeed legacy is expensive, I would rather support a company which is moving fwds not backwards! It is also a lot cheaper from the manufacturer than many dealiers in teh UK which is silly. It is very nice. A touch of selenium kills the warmth before col change kicks in. Splits well too!

 

[PeterB]

I'm starting to suspect I got a bad batch, because the time I tested the "NEW" Oriental Seagull in the black-and-white packages, it was really flat - I think mine may have been fogged at the factory.

It is entirely possible that you had a bad batch. When the NEW stuff first started coming out, it certainly suffered from high base+fog density. I know from 1st hand experience because I have about 200-300 sheets of the stuff gathering dust in my darkroom. The new manufacturer [1] has probably lifted their game since then but I'm not about to waste any more money on a company that did such a bad job with the initial quality control of their NEW papers.
For more info, read past threads (there was a url link here which no longer exists) .

regards
Peter

[1] Oriental Seagull (the name is owned by Cybergraphics) stopped making their own papers years ago.

 

[Wayne]

A few years ago, I tested papers and developers head-to-head. PDFs of the articles published in View Camera are available for free download at www.circleofthesunproductions.com. I tested Oriental graded and VC.

The PDFs include Part IV, never published, about Azo.

Unfortunately Oriental has changed again recently, presumably since these tests were done, and by most accounts the change seems to be for the worse.



Wayne

 

[Jim Noel]

I have used Oriental since it was only available in SIngle Weight. I don't recall how far back that was. MY freezer stillcontains a few dozen boxes of the early grade paper in the blue box. I have used some of the more recent iterations, and they do not resemble the early stuff in Dmin or Dmax.

Someone earlier indicated they began using it when it first came out in the mid 80's. If this datingis true, Ansel never used it. He passed away APril 8, 1984.

 

[David Lindquist]

In _The Print_ ( The New Ansel Adams Photography Series/ Book 3), copyright 1983, Ansel Adams comments on several "contemporary" papers: Ilford Gallerie, Ilford Ilfobrom, Oriental Seagull, Zone Vi Studios Brilliant, Agfa Portriga and assorted Kodak papers. Of Seagull, he said "This paper has had exceptional quality and consistency." He also comments that the grades appear to be higher in contrast than similarly numbered papers by other manufacturers. Of course all his descriptions would of products as they were in the early 1980's.

 

[juan]

A few years ago, I tested papers and developers head-to-head. PDFs of the articles published in View Camera are available for free download at www.circleofthesunproductions.com. I tested Oriental graded and VC.

The PDFs include Part IV, never published, about Azo.

The reasons to read Bruce's excellent articles are not for his results (a lot has changed in only two years) but for his method and what he took into consideration. Each photographer should make his or her own tests.
juan

 

[Zathras]

Slightly off topic but possibly relevant

In _The Print_ ( The New Ansel Adams Photography Series/ Book 3), copyright 1983, Ansel Adams comments on several "contemporary" papers: Ilford Gallerie, Ilford Ilfobrom, Oriental Seagull, Zone Vi Studios Brilliant, Agfa Portriga and assorted Kodak papers. Of Seagull, he said "This paper has had exceptional quality and consistency." He also comments that the grades appear to be higher in contrast than similarly numbered papers by other manufacturers. Of course all his descriptions would of products as they were in the early 1980's.

Back in the mid 70's, when I was in high school, Unicolor used to import a B&W paper from Japan which was called something like " Unicolor BW Exhibition Paper". This was an incredibly cheap paper that produced surprisingly good results, with deep blacks, bright whites, a great tonal range and it had a beautiful unferrotyped smooth glossy finish.

This was a good thing for a high school student whose chief source of income was a paper route. The price difference between this paper and the Kodak, Agfa and Ilford papers of that time was enough to offset the cost of a few more rolls of film each month.

This paper disappeared while I was in the Navy. When I got out, Freestyle was selling an inexpensive paper called "Oriental Seagull" that my photo friends were all raving about. So I ordered some, and when I made my first prints on Seagull, I came to the conclusion that Seagull was actually my beloved Unicolor B&W from my high school years. It looked identical to the Unicolor, it came from Japan, it behaved just like the Unicolor paper and it was cheeeep. I used a lot of this paper until it got too expensive for me. I feel that the stuff that is being sold as "Seagull" these days doesn't come close to the original. I now use Forte Polygrade V as well as what's left of my Polymax Fine Art. Thank God for the Forte.

Does anyone here know if the Unicolor paper was in fact re-packaged Seagull?

Mike Sullivan