Resurrection of some former Agfa products

[rusty71]

Well. I sure hope AGFA MCC and even the resin coated stuff will make a comeback. Since the recent demise of Forte, we need a good warmtone fiber paper. Now the film I'm not so sure about. If we could get Agfapan 100 and 25 back it would be worth it. But just another 100 speed or even 400 speed emulsion would only fragment the market even more. Ilford, Efke, Foma and even Kodak are still big players in the B&W film market. Each has their niche....Kodak for Tri-X, TMAX and its wide distribution network. Ilford for their versatile and complete line of film. FOMA because it's cheap. Efke because they have some truly unique emulsions.That's about all we need for now, unless something really unique and useful comes along.

 

[Philippe-Georges]

When I 'worked' in a darkroom for the first time, I was then 16 years old (1974), it was to develop a AGFA-GEVAERT Agfapan 400 film in Rodinal.
I continued doing so, without mentioning the side steps and its incidental disillusionments, till the demise of AGFAPHOTO. Then I turned towards ILFORD (not bad at all!), but I still do hanker for the Agfa products. This is not out of conservatism, but Agfa (-Gevaert) got into my fingers after all these years...
Needless to tell you how happy I am to hear that Agfa is resurrecting!
So please do count me in for a sample (and as a client in the future)...

Good luck,
Philippe

 

[Fotohuis]

The problem with all those new attempts to reach the old material qualifications is that it's impossible to reproduce the same photo paper and film on another coating line.
So a lot of product specific parameters are going to be lost.

Further the economic profitability for each square meter photo paper is at least 5 times less effective than the same amount of film production.
One of the reasons putting a new paper on the market is not without any risk.

Just a matter of time what is going to happen in the future but all is depending on a more or less stable (niche) market.

 

[ijsbeer]

e-mail sent.

THanx Adox

 

[Harrigan]

What we like about Agfa MCC 111:

-- The slightly warm emulsion tones in the midrange.

-- The inky blacks.

-- The range and smooth tone transitions in highlights and lighter midtones -- perfect for printing facial skintones in portraiture.

--The reliable consistency and quality of the emulsion.

-- It dries flat. (A HUGE plus for the paper.)

-- The color of the paper base. It would be okay if it were a bit whiter, but not so white as to verge on blue.

What we don't like:

-- The finish could be a little less glossy.

[Sorry, it's a short list of dislikes. ]

No one has mentioned Agfa MCC 118. I LOVED this paper's color and emulsion, but never used it for one big reason: I hated the pebbly texture. If you could find a way to resurrect MCC 118 with a typical dull/gloss finish, I would buy thousands of sheets of the stuff.

Sanders McNew

I would add the MC III is very versatile paper easily and readily exploiting the different properties of the many paper developer and toner combinations. I can easily get anything from warm to cold and inbetween by varying the paper developer toner combo.

Also it was the most consistent emulsion I have ever used. Variance from box to box was nill. I've had ilford wt vary by as much as 2 full steps in contrast box to box while the agfa III was right on the money.

I prefer the good gloss for landscapes.

I also love the inky blacks being black and not brown black like most wt papers.

 

[ADOX Fotoimpex]

The problem with all those new attempts to reach the old material qualifications is that it's impossible to reproduce the same photo paper and film on another coating line.
So a lot of product specific parameters are going to be lost.

As far as MCC is concerned using a different coating line really isn´t the problem. If at all the problem lies in the precipitation and the raw ingredients but we solved most of that and the rest is beeing solved these days.
This is why it is so important that we are using the exact same precipitation vessels, controling software and run protocols.
Agfa itself has used several different coating lines for making MCC in the past years before shutdown but they alwas made the emulsions in Leverkusen and shipped them to the respective coating destination (just like we are doing now).

The problems in coating do exist, I don´t want to put them asside, but they are solvable. It is a matter of adjusting the emulsions to the parameters of the coating line and every skilled emulsionist or coating engineer will confirm that it is a question of a few more or less runs in order to get the process adapted (e.g. adjusting the viscosity of the emulsions to the speed of the line and the temperature of the stiffing section and to choose the right parameters on the controler of the drying section).

We are doing exactly this at the moment on the test coating line. If we hit it right on the spot in the first run the samples will be ready by the end of next week. If not we need to make a few more runs until the process is properly bedded in.

If anyone out there should really be in doubt about the comparability or the quality of the paper he or she is welcome to participate in the testing together with the others.
After all this is why we do all this. To show what can be done in a micro factory and to get feedback.
Except for "half-scientific" tests (e.g. if the paper harmonizes with a certain lith developer or developer and toner combination etc.) we are 100% on Agfa´s old specs acording to all of Agfa´s old standard protocols.

News:

The width of the small coater is 24 cm including coating edge. We decided to cut the samples INCLUDING the coating edge to 24x25,4 cm (X by 10 Inch) in order to make the sample confectioning easier.
The usable size will be just above 8x10 Inch because towards the edge the quality will fall off and eventually there will be just a track of white paper base left and right.

Have fun with the samples- everyone who applied sofar is counted in.

Best regards,

Mirko

 

[jmdavis]

Mirko,

I would be interested in testing the paper. MC111 was/is my favorite RC paper. How should I provide you with my information?


Mike Davis

 

[Rolleiflexible]

Mirko, is it possible that you all might also resurrect the MCC 118 paper? IF so, could you do it without that annoying pebble surface? I loved the color and tone of the paper and emulsion, but couldn't get past the pebble texture to use it. Is it too soon to be thinking down the road to other Agfa papers you might eventually bring to market?

 

[George Papantoniou]

Dear Santa,

I would like Portriga Rapid, Record Rapid, Ektalure and the old Oriental back in production...:rolleyes:

 

[ADOX Fotoimpex]

Test Samples

How should I provide you with my information?

Please send an email with your address to: mccproject@adox.de

Best regards,

Mirko

 

[ADOX Fotoimpex]

More projects

Is it too soon to be thinking down the road to other Agfa papers you might eventually bring to market?

ofcourse not !

We can discuss almost anything but our time is booked until about this time next year with the MCC/MCP and the films. Any additional project couldn´t start before this date and ofcourse will only be looked into if the other projects have been economically succesfull.

We have already considered Portriga Rapid as a fixed grade paper in order to round up the product portfolio. But these papers beeing discontinued before the ecologists went totaly crazy, contained (..not-noticeable amounts of..) mercury and cadmium. Both mercury and cadmium may not be used anymore (even if you can proof that you take less than the average amount beeing present in the environment anyways) and no one knows if the subtitutes will produe a paper as nice as the old one was because these substances are actually affecting the crystal build up. The old formulations are also based on active gelatins. Active gelatins do not exist anymore and the modern inert types usually cause a decrease in speed which needs to be compensated by a separate sensitization. So even if we start on original equipment with original formulations the paper coming out of this will be a somewhat different one.

I guess if there is enough interest form you guys we can possibly look into this in a way like this: We´ll play with the formulations for a while and update them to a modern standard with parameters which we would consider ideal. Then we coat a few samples and send them out to former users of the old type. After this it would depend on your vote if the paper is worth beeing made.

Best regards,

Mirko

Just so there is no confusion. The above apllies only to the remake of ancient products which have been discontinued for many years. The above does not refer to the MCC project or the film project.

 

[Rolleiflexible]

Mirko, that's very cool. It's fantastic to see a firm with the interest and the resources to keep B+W papers alive like this.

I understand the problems you mention with papers like Portriga. How about a more modest effort, like MCC 118? That was a modern paper, shouldn't be so difficult to replicate. (Just dump the pebble surface, please. )

Sanders

 

[PHOTOTONE]

Is there any reason why the modern versions of these papers can't be BETTER than the originals?

 

[George Papantoniou]

ofcourse not !

We have already considered Portriga Rapid as a fixed grade paper in order to round up the product portfolio. But these papers beeing discontinued before the ecologists went totaly crazy, contained (..not-noticeable amounts of..) mercury and cadmium. Both mercury and cadmium may not be used anymore (even if you can proof that you take less than the average amount beeing present in the environment anyways) and no one knows if the subtitutes will produe a paper as nice as the old one was because these substances are actually affecting the crystal build up.

Dear Santa,

There is a simple solution for this problem: Install the production plant in Greece. Here we can use all the forbidden chemicals without telling anyone the we do, and if there ever is a control (this doesn't happen more often than a total solar eclipse) we can always bribe them or convince them that the containers that say "mercury" and "cadmium" are actually fakes, or were forgotten here by the previous owner, or we keep them there but don't use them (a friend of ours asked us if he could leave them in our plant for a while), etc etc... After all, I doubt that there exists any environmental issue control at all in Greece...

 

[Phillip P. Dimor]

The first 4x5 sheet film and 35mm non-kodak film I ever used was Agfa. And the last large paper purchase I've made was Agfa MCP two years ago. This post brightened my day after watching the Red Sox lose last night.

 

[Bob Carnie]

I am in agreement with George, lets get some cadium back in the emulsion.

Dear Santa,

I would like Portriga Rapid, Record Rapid, Ektalure and the old Oriental back in production...:rolleyes:

 

[Jersey Vic]

I would really appreciate it if you could (also) reproduce 118 as it was as although a 'traditional' matt paper would be welcome as well.

Thanks Again and good luck.

Victor

 

[Photo Engineer]

I have several of the formulas such as Portriga and Brovira, and I have the Cadmium here on the shelf. Just give me some time.

Actually, my Brovira / Kodabromide looks pretty good so far.

PE

 

[juan]

I have several of the formulas such as Portriga and Brovira, and I have the Cadmium here on the shelf. Just give me some time.

Actually, my Brovira / Kodabromide looks pretty good so far.

PE

Dammit, PE, get crackin'.
We want more, more, more.
juan

 

[Ian Grant]

Don't we all Ron, these formulae were released by the allies after WWII. The books (Glafkides) are however extremely difficult to find. I read a copy which belonged to the french Autochrome company, well more strictly a grandson of the owners.

I had the Cadmium on my shelf, last used in a white toner Think deviant coat emulsion on a black pase process then tone white !!!!! Was a very dirty white though

Ian

I have several of the formulas such as Portriga and Brovira, and I have the Cadmium here on the shelf. Just give me some time.

Actually, my Brovira / Kodabromide looks pretty good so far.

PE

 

[Photo Engineer]

Of course, the old Agfa formulas are well known, but the Kodak formulas are not except those used at EFKE to the current day.

Neither can be easily duplicated due to the change in gelatin between then and now unless one can get the analogs to the old, unoxidized gelatins.

So, I have to 'fudge' to get things to work properly with current US and French gelatins which are available to me. Anyone taking the published Brovira formula with a current photo grade gelatin would be sadly dissapointed with the results. In fact, this is true of all of the formulas currently published in texts.

PE

 

[PHOTOTONE]

Efke uses Kodak formulas?

Of course, the old Agfa formulas are well known, but the Kodak formulas are not except those used at EFKE to the current day.


PE

This is a very curious observation. What Kodak formulas would Efke be using? I thought Efke was once a part of the Dupont family of photo companies? Or, acquired formulas from Dupont?

 

[Photo Engineer]

I was given to believe that EFKE was at one time, a Kodak plant. I was told that since it was taken over during the war there were captured Kodak formulas there from the pre 1940s.

If it was not so, then they don't directly use old Kodak formulas, but from what I have seen, they use an old Kodak coater and emulsion making equipment. In addition, captured Kodak formulas from European factories do exist in their pre 1940 embodiments in Europe. Some companies use analogs to these for their products to this day, as well as using Agfa analogs.

In fact, Kodak Azo paper and Agfa Lupex are very similar, as are Brovira and Kodabromide.

PE

 

[PHOTOTONE]

I was under the impression that Efke was originally Adox, and Adox was at one time part of the Dupont group. Efke do currently make the Adox films.

 

[Nick Zentena]

I was given to believe that EFKE was at one time, a Kodak plant. I was told that since it was taken over during the war there were captured Kodak formulas there from the pre 1940s.

That was Forte?