RC-V-FB

[Ole]

"Baryta" is a technical name for barite, which is a mineralogical name for barium sulfate. It is white, heavy, completely insoluble, and fairly cheap. We use it by the ton as a weight addition to drilling mud in the oil industry.

All current fiber papers have a baryta layer, with one exception: Bergger makes an uncoated one - I can't remember the name of it right now.

This pre-emulsion coating has been used for a very long time, in fact I believe some of the earliest "gas light" papers were baryta coated!

As to toning: RC papers generally tone as well as fiber, but may be more reluctant to change of tone. Which might be a boon if you want archivally toned neutral black prints; try Ilford MG IV in selenium. Even Viradon gives only a very slight warming!

 

[paul ron]

Bayrita is a new addition to papers by almost all manufacuters these days. It does make whites whiter but it allows the emulsion to sit on the surface of the paper not saturating into the paper base. I believe it's a profit thing and not a quality feature although sold as such.

I compare reprints of my old work and can see a difference in what you say is a subjective observation. Perhaps it is subjective but I do like the feel of my older prints. Maybe it's the patina of the aging process or it may just be the difference between salted papper vs the new emulsions or the Bayrita layer. All I can say about paper today is it all stinks. I find my mid tones are lost although i am getting beautiful negatives as compared to my old Plus X and Tri X, very grainny negs in comparrison to the TMX TMY films today. Maybe agin something subjective but I am having a dificult time finding a good paper.

I hear Illford MG FB is a very nice warm paper. I like the warm tone of Agfa's Bromide papers like their Portriga which has been replaced by Record Rapid which doesn't have the same warmth but is a close second. I tried their ART grade paper and am dissapointed in it.

FB is nice to work with, I don't like the plastic feel of RC and I don't have an RC dryer. I also like the smell of FB in my drum dryer.

 

[Tom Hoskinson]

Ron, as Ole said: "This pre-emulsion coating has been used for a very long time, in fact I believe some of the earliest "gas light" papers were baryta coated!"

Virtually all commercial photo papers are sized or coated. If there is no coating or "sizing" the emulsion will indeed go down into the paper. That is ok if that is the effect you are looking for, but you may need to coat the paper yourself to achieve it.

You may want to look into Kodak's AZO printing process and materials. The AZO process is still alive and well (at least for the near term).

 

[Ed Sukach]

My curiosity was piqued ... so I consulted ... "The Encyclopedia of Photography", Volume 3, pages 398 - 399 - copyrighted MCMLXII - MCMLXXVIII (1962 - 1978) - an entire article titled "Baryta Coating for Papers" by H. E. Smith of the Eastman Kodak Company.
In it he describes the "new" refined barium sulfate (BaSO4) known as "blanc fixe" - an improvement over the previous - cruder - forms of baryta used in the past.
Hmmm ... "It is also a by-product in manufacturing hydrogen peroxide from barium peroxide ... "

 

[Donald Miller]

Can one achieve the depth of Fibre on RC? Can one archivally tone RC with Selenium or Sistan?

As for "depth" - I would not have a clue. That is subjective - I would not know how to measure it objectively .. all I can suggest is trying RC paper, and evaluating it for yourself. I *really* like Ilford's Multigrade "Portfolio" and I'd suggest it to anyone - but this is a lot like asking a waitress in a restaurant, "Will I *like* the Tournedos Rossini?" - I have *no* way of knowing.

The way that I would measure the depth of a paper would be to expose the paper to a 21 step Stouffer tablet. After development one could read the dmax, dmin, and by reading the reflection densities of the density step exposures of the paper the curve for the paper could be plotted. This could be done on other papers that one wanted to evaluate.

By way of information View Camera Magazine has had articles on papers and developers recently. I understand that the person writing those articles will have about 400 prints at the View Camera Conference for individual viewing. This will cover a number of papers and a number of developers.

Depth is, to me, more then the measure of dmax. It also involves the slope and the shape of the curve. It does little good, in my opinion, to have a deeper black if the adjacent tonalities are not well differentiated.

I haven't used RC paper in over twenty years and chose long ago that fiber paper was more in keeping with the presentation that I wanted. The papers that I use today are Oriental Seagull Graded Fiber for a neutral paper and JandC Classic Polywarmtone variable contrast for a warm tone paper. These are the papers that are consistant with my vision. I realize in saying this that paper choice is a personal one. Other's tastes may vary.

 

[Ed Sukach]

Can one achieve the depth of Fibre on RC? Can one archivally tone RC with Selenium or Sistan?

As for "depth" - I would not have a clue.

The way that I would measure the depth of a paper would be to expose the paper to a 21 step Stouffer tablet....

That I can do.

That really wasn't *my* definition of "depth", though. I see "depth" as the impression of including a third dimension. The most striking example of this that I've seen is in a collage of prints done on Ilford's "portfolio", printed from IR (Konica 750) negatives. These give a definite impression of a "stereoscopic" image - without the viewer. I've contemplated and studied these for some time now ... I'm still not sure *why*.

But ... having the different densities falling close to where they *should* be --- uh ... "Tonal Fidelity"?

 

[Donald Miller]

Can one achieve the depth of Fibre on RC? Can one archivally tone RC with Selenium or Sistan?

As for "depth" - I would not have a clue.

The way that I would measure the depth of a paper would be to expose the paper to a 21 step Stouffer tablet....

That I can do.

That really wasn't *my* definition of "depth", though. I see "depth" as the impression of including a third dimension. The most striking example of this that I've seen is in a collage of prints done on Ilford's "portfolio", printed from IR (Konica 750) negatives. These give a definite impression of a "stereoscopic" image - without the viewer. I've contemplated and studied these for some time now ... I'm still not sure *why*.

But ... having the different densities falling close to where they *should* be --- uh ... "Tonal Fidelity"?

I think that a given paper in which either the paper characteristics are such that it has a long straight line characteristic with abreviated toe and shoulder, or the photographer has tested the paper and then tailored the camera negative accordingly. Either of these conditions will give the result that you describe. This occurs, in my experience, with the papers that I mentioned earlier. It is my observation that very few people take the time to determine paper characteristics. That requires determining reflection densities of the paper in the manner that I suggested. Hence it seems that they are hard put to utilize the potential of the material. Have you tested the papers that you use by determining the reflection densities and corresponding exposure curve?