Updated Foma MG Classic papers?

[removedacct3]

Today by chance saw a post from Wolfgang Moersch on Flickr in which he mentioned 'new Fomatone 131 semi gloss' paper. I asked him if Foma is about to update its product range, but unfortunately he did not know anything about that. Quite the opposite, he was quite surprised as well.

Naturally I checked the Foma site as well as their official webstore, but neither mentioned anything about any updates.

Is there anybody in the know?

 

[Rudeofus]

I have ordered and received Fomatone MG Classic last November and it behaved as usual. I would be very surprised, if Fomatone MG Classic saw an update between then and now.

For quite some time there was Fomatone MG (without "Classic"). In fact Fomatone MG Classic was recreated when people complained about the lack of lith development with then new Fomatone MG. Foma can update this paper every day, if they so chose, I don't care.

 

[gone]

Foma can update this paper every day,

Please, don't encourage them.

Is this their paper that doesn't like hardly any safelight lights at all? I had some fogging from one of their 131 papers until I started working almost in the dark. Got some nice prints that way, and a lot of nice kinks too. The paper was quite a bit thinner than the Ilford papers that I had been using previously. Once I learned the hard way about those two things the darkroom work went a lot better.

 

[miha]

Perhaps a batch out of specs?

 

[Tim Stapp]

Please, don't encourage them.

Is this their paper that doesn't like hardly any safelight lights at all? I had some fogging from one of their 131 papers until I started working almost in the dark. Got some nice prints that way, and a lot of nice kinks too. The paper was quite a bit thinner than the Ilford papers that I had been using previously. Once I learned the hard way about those two things the darkroom work went a lot better.

Were you using red or OC safelight? I ask because it's my understanding that FOMA (despite what Freestyle says about their Arista EDU RC papers) require a red safelight.

When I can get my new darkroom set up, I'll test the Arista EDU rc paper vs. the Ilford.

 

[mshchem]

Never had a problem with safelight. Foma makes amazing fiber base paper, I've never used their rc paper. Fomatone may be my all time favorite.

 

[redbandit]

foma rc doesnt mind the AP orange color light sold by freestyle. Just remember to use the recommended safe distance and your good.

Besides, foma customer support told me, to USE the safelight to verify the emulsion side on every sheet of paper as i use it.

 

[koraks]

Today by chance saw a post from Wolfgang Moersch on Flickr in which he mentioned 'new Fomatone 131 semi gloss' paper. I asked him if Foma is about to update its product range, but unfortunately he did not know anything about that. Quite the opposite, he was quite surprised as well.

Is it possible that the 'new' adjective used by Moersch didn't apply to the version of the paper as such, and that this confused you (and then, you managed to confuse him some more)? I ask because I know Moersch is not a native English speaker and I've seen English translations of/by him in the past that were awkward in terms of word order. Which isn't surprising, as the word order when read as a German text made perfect sense So, TL;DR - could this just be an instance of something being lost in translation?

 

[Rudeofus]

Is it possible that the 'new' adjective used by Moersch didn't apply to the version of the paper as such, and that this confused you (and then, you managed to confuse him some more)? I ask because I know Moersch is not a native English speaker and I've seen English translations of/by him in the past that were awkward in terms of word order. Which isn't surprising, as the word order when read as a German text made perfect sense So, TL;DR - could this just be an instance of something being lost in translation?

Good point. Since Moersch is a passionate lith printer, he may have used the term "new" just to highlight it being not Fomatone MG Classic.

 

[miha]

A remark as found at one of the EU vendors:

 

[removedacct3]

Thank you miha, that pretty much settles it!

 

[Guillaume Zuili]

Most importantly Wolfgang said that this version doesn't Lith.

 

[koraks]

Most importantly Wolfgang said that this version doesn't Lith.

That's pretty relevant. Where & when did he say this?

 

[Klaus_H]

He published it on his homepage.

 

[koraks]

Thanks, Klaus. So he doesn't say it doesn't lith. Just that it doesn't lith as strongly or colorful as previous batches:

Der Litheffekt, nämlich die Trennung der tiefen Schatten von den benachbarten Tonwerten, ist weniger ausgeprägt und die Farbigkeit ist erheblich geringer als mit den Chargen zuvor.

 

[Guillaume Zuili]

That's pretty relevant. Where & when did he say this?

He emailed me.

Hello Guillaume,

I hope you are well.
I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but I have to warn you about the current batch of Fomatone 131. I haven't published this yet, but this batch 077848-01, also recognisable by the designation SEMI GLOSSY (instead of glossy) is not suitable for lithprinting. No matter how the developer is adjusted, there is no lith effect and also not the formerly known colour.
Perhaps it will take some time, before it arrives in the states.

Best regards
Wolfgang

 

[koraks]

Well, that's more adamant and worrying than the statement on his homepage. Too bad; this paper was a safe choice for easy lith printing.