RC paper users

[miha]

Convenience, price, environmental concerns, aesthetics? Do you often feel you need to justify your paper choice?

 

[MattKing]

No. I really like the results I obtain from Ilford and Oriental RC papers.

 

[mshchem]

RC paper is wonderful stuff. Easy to process and gives great results. I still use fiber based as well.

I haven't used any RC papers other than Ilford in recent years, I used a lot of Agfa in the past. The latest RC papers are great.

 

[albada]

Convenience:

Washing is fast.
Drying is fast.
Almost no curl.

 

[Paul Howell]

I use both RC and FB, I perfer RC when I want a glossy surface, FB for a semimatt, I use RC for proofs and working prints, then move on to FB for a presentation print, unless a high gloss is needed in which case I stick with RC. I use Foma and Ultrafine, PhotoWearhouse, house brand papers.

 

[brian steinberger]

If time is a factor it’s always RC. Sometimes it’s fun to take a recent roll of negatives in the darkroom and just have fun and crank out a few prints. The results are good, but not as good as FB. My best images still go on FB, when I have time!

 

[BradS]

We used FB and RC in school. Since then, I've only ever used RC paper. It is fabulous.
Why would one need to justify using RC paper?

 

[images39]

I only use RC paper. Mostly Ilford (Pearl finish for prints, glossy for contact sheets), and sometimes Kentmere (lustre finish). Paper that looks great, washes in 2 minutes and stays flat... what's not to like?

The only time I used FB was in a workshop several years ago. I couldn't tell the difference.

Dale

 

[Chuck_P]

Some years ago I tried to submit photo in a local photography showing; they let it show, but let me know that it really should be on fiber base paper.

 

[MattKing]

Some years ago I tried to submit photo in a local photography showing; they let it show, but let me know that it really should be on fiber base paper.

That really must be many years ago!
Most of the local photography showings now don't expect anything other than inkjet prints.

 

[Chuck_P]

That really must be many years ago!
Most of the local photography showings now don't expect anything other than inkjet prints.

Yes it was, probably 15 years.

 

[NortheastPhotographic]

In a mat, behind glass, it's all the same. The new generation Ilford RC paper is beautiful! I like fiber papers but use them only for special prints. You'd be crazy to spend all that time, money, and water on every proof that passes through your darkroom. And in fact, when working really large, I prefer RC. So 16x20 and up, I really wouldn't bother with fiber.

Recently I was curious about the keeping properties of RC vs fiber, so I contact Ilford. They believe that a properly treated RC print, especially one that has gone through a Sistan bath, will have the same general keeping properties of fiber.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I use RC paper and FB paper, both glossy. I like the feel of the FB better and tend to use FB for something I will want to mat and frame for the walls, although there is no reason why RC paper can be used for the same thing.

 

[brian steinberger]

Recently I was curious about the keeping properties of RC vs fiber, so I contact Ilford. They believe that a properly treated RC print, especially one that has gone through a Sistan bath, will have the same general keeping properties of fiber.

Is Sistan still available anywhere?

 

[Oren Grad]

Look for Adostab:

https://www.adox.de/Photo/chemistry/toners-helping-aids/adostab/

https://www.freestylephoto.biz/6514...tan-Image-Stabilizer-With-Wetting-Agent-500ml

 

[brian steinberger]

Look for Adostab:

https://www.adox.de/Photo/chemistry/toners-helping-aids/adostab/

https://www.freestylephoto.biz/6514...tan-Image-Stabilizer-With-Wetting-Agent-500ml

Awesome thanks!

 

[GregY]

I use RC for proofing sometimes. For enlargements and exhibition prints i use FB paper. The only prints I've ever had to replace were 2 -20x24" prints on RC that silvered out. They were printed in batches with FB prints and well washed and selenium toned. I don't have an explanation for it....but it did play into my decision to stick with fiber paper. I'm not trying to flame anyone...that's just been my personal experience.

 

[Pieter12]

I prefer the feel of FB. Just a tad thicker than RC. I haven’t tried the portfolio paper yet. But FB just feels better and I believe the blacks are deeper than RC.

 

[GregY]

I prefer the feel of FB. Just a tad thicker than RC. I haven’t tried the portfolio paper yet. But FB just feels better and I believe the blacks are deeper than RC.

I have the same impression & of greater image depth with FB. I don't mind thinner paper...I printed a lot on single weight Azo.

 

[NortheastPhotographic]

I prefer the feel of FB. Just a tad thicker than RC. I haven’t tried the portfolio paper yet. But FB just feels better and I believe the blacks are deeper than RC.

FB paper is definitely more premium, no doubt. But the fact remains that when a print is behind glass in a mat, you're not feeling the relative thickness or texture at all. Also, the newer RC multigrade paper has pretty much the same image characteristics and even speed as FB Multigrade Classic. You have a lot of folks doing their proofs and tests on RC and then going to fiber for final prints with little, if any changes to the printing scheme.

The one area where FB reigns absolutely supreme is in the glossy finish. RC gloss is more garish and just looks kind of 'commercial' to use that term derogatorily.

 

[pentaxuser]

Maybe RC is still not the "done thing" in certain echelons of photographic society? I once was invited to a weekend shooting party on an English aristocrat's estate and I turned up with a perfectly serviceable shotgun but it got some very disapproving stares from the other parties, just because it was easier to carry under my coat. It was a sawn-off one

pentaxuser

 

[MattKing]

Maybe RC is still not the "done thing" in certain echelons of photographic society? I once was invited to a weekend shooting party on an English aristocrat's estate and I turned up with a perfectly serviceable shotgun but it got some very disapproving stares from the other parties, just because it was easier to carry under my coat. It was a sawn-off one

pentaxuser

I'm pretty sure that this was intended to be funny.....
But if the UK law is similar to ours, possession of a "sawed-off" shotgun in Canada is an indictable offense!
Did you get hauled off to the slammer?

 

[pentaxuser]

I'm pretty sure that this was intended to be funny.....
But if the UK law is similar to ours, possession of a "sawed-off" shotgun in Canada is an indictable offense!
Did you get hauled off to the slammer?

Hauled off to the slammer, did you say! I am still there Matt!

pentaxuser

 

[DWThomas]

I use both types, generally Ilford. I am not even sure how/why things got this way, but I use 8x10 RC pearl surface for quick tests, including contact prints from my 8x10 pinhole camera and about 85% FB warm tone semi-matte 11x14 for exhibition prints. Even made a mask setup to contact print a full 8x10 negative centered on 11x14. I also admit I don't do a whole lot of printing.

 

[miha]

I purchased a box of Ilford MGRC the other day. Looking forward to try it and see if it any different to the previous version that I never got along with.