Using my Foma contrast filters with Ilford Multigrade paper - Should I?

[BSP]

I mostly print on Foma paper (both RC and fiber) using the Forma contrast filters.
I am very happy with the results (and the cost) but would like to mix it up a bit with some Ilford Multigrade RC and fiber paper

Can I expect to get good results using my Foma contrast filters of do the Ilford filters contain some sort of magic that justifies their much higher price?

 

[AgX]

Ilford Multigrade manual:

"OTHER VARIABLE CONTRAST ENLARGER HEADS
The contrast of MULTIGRADE papers can be controlled with the range of variable contrast enlarger heads that are currently available. Some of these are easier to use than others, and several give excellent results. Many manufacturers make variable contrast heads for their enlargers which are specially designed for use with MULTIGRADE papers. Enlarger heads that have been designed in conjunction with ILFORD include those from De Vere, Dunco, Kaiser, Leitz, LPL and Meopta. For use with MULTIGRADE papers, follow the instructions provided by the enlarger manufacture!"

ambiguous...

 

[BSP]

Iford Multigrade manual:

"OTHER VARIABLE CONTRAST ENLARGER HEADS
The contrast of MULTIGRADE papers can be controlled with the range of variable contrast enlarger heads that are currently available. Some of these are easier to use than others, and several give excellent results. Many manufacturers make variable contrast heads for their enlargers which are specially designed for use with MULTIGRADE papers. Enlarger heads that have been designed in conjunction with ILFORD include those from De Vere, Dunco, Kaiser, Leitz, LPL and Meopta. For use with MULTIGRADE papers, follow the instructions provided by the enlarger manufacture!"

That is very detailed information as we would expect from Ilford for which I thank you. I did not even know there was an actual Multigrade manual
However, it says exactly nothing specific about the Foma contrast filters.
Would you interpret this as saying: the Foma filters should work fine with the Ilford papers?

Bill

 

[tezzasmall]

Sorry, but the only way I can see you finding out the answer to your questions, is to try them!...

One can buy a smaller packet or two of Ilford papers reasonably priced, but the filters, when bought new, are quite expensive, but worth the price if you decide to use their paper also.

You might want to send an email to Ilford and maybe Foma themselves and see what their answer is. I'd be interested to hear the answer myself, as I have received prints in exchanges, made on Forma paper, and I like the results very much.

As an after thought, I have used oddments of various papers given to me over the years, that haven't been Ilford brand, and both Kodak and Ilford filters have worked with all. From this I presume that the variously branded filters are the same or at least very similar in colour.

*** Just checking the Foma website, they say the following about filters.
Note that there seems to be NO mention of having to use one particular brand of filter with a different brand of paper! ***

FOMABROM VARIANT III can be exposed in all types of enlargers and printers
equipped with tungsten or tungsten halogen lamps. Particularly suitable are devices
with a special colour mixing head for multi - contrast papers. Other enlargers can also
be used, but separate correction filters should be inserted during exposure.

Contrast control
The contrast can be continuously varied from extra soft (contrast grade 0 resp. 00) to
ultra hard (contrast grade 5). FOMABROM VARIANT III being orthochromatically
sensitized, its contrast is controlled using yellow and magenta filters during
exposure. If only the blue sensitized part of the emulsion is exposed (under magenta
filters), the contrast will increase; if the green sensitized part of the emulsion is
exposed (under yellow filters), the contrast will reduce. The following methods and
devices are recommended for contrast control:

- standard sets of filters for variable - contrast papers (e.g. Foma Variant Filters, Ilford
Multigrade Filters, etc.)

- magenta and yellow filters in colour mixing heads

- special enlargingheads for variable
- contrast papers
- colour printing filters (yellow and magenta)
- colour printers with a programme for variable
- contrast papers
-black and white printers with an inserted magenta filter for hard and ultra hard
contrast grades

Terry S

 

[Stanislav Boščík]

Meopta Color heads can be used with Ilford MG papers for sure. Using gelatin filters should be ok as well therefore.

Comparing datasheets I would say those should be quite equivalent:

Meopta 2xY ~ Ilford 1/2 or Ilford 1
Meopta Y ~ Ilford 1 1/2
Meopta M1 ~ Ilford 2 or Ilford 2 1/2
Meopta 2xM1 ~ Ilford 2 1/2 or Ilford 3
Meopta M2 ~ Ilford 4
Meopta 2xM2 ~ Ilford 4 1/2

But this is my estimate and I would recommend to make your own calibration...

 

[AgX]

The above Ilford statement is ambiguous and also applies only on the Multigrade heads.

But from Meopta:
"Meograde
Meograde head is a device of black and white gradation scale Multigrade photographic papers."


The Meopta colour heads employ neither the Durst nor the Kodak scale, but the Agfa scale.

Here Ilford say:

On the Meopta variable-contrast foil filters I got no information.

 

[BSP]

Sorry, but the only way I can see you finding out the answer to your questions, is to try them!...
....
Terry S

Which is exactly what I am going to do as I managed to find a set of Ilford filters on the second hand market at about half price.
I will report my findings back here once I have made some prints..

I have only just recently found and joined this forum after my conversion to 100% analog at the beginning of this year.
Naturally I assumed that everyone here uses Foma paper and filters too .

Silly me.....

Bill

 

[Doremus Scudder]

Foma Variant filters work the same way as the Ilford Multigrade filters, by adjusting the amount of magenta vs yellow filtration (passing blue and green light respectively). They should work just fine with any variable-contrast paper from any manufacturer including Ilford Multigrade. Your results may not be exactly the same, e.g., the contrast steps might be slightly different and the extremes of hard and soft might be a bit different, but you should be able to vary your printing contrast with them just fine. Don't bother buying Multigrade filters till you've used the Foma filters and have some issue with them. I'll bet you won't.

Best,

Doremus

 

[pentaxuser]

Which is exactly what I am going to do as I managed to find a set of Ilford filters on the second hand market at about half price.
.

Bill

Just bear in mind that separate filters that are placed under the lens or above the lens in a filter drawer do wear out with use. Simon Galley who used to work for Ilford recommended that if used regularly Ilford filters should be changed for new ones about every 5 years. So it depends on how much they have been used especially the grades that are used the most which tend to be from grades 2-3.5

pentaxuser

 

[BSP]

Doremus & pentaxuser, both thanks for sharing your insights. I already ordered the second hand but as good as new set of Ilford filters to make some comparisons with the Foma filters. I mostly do splitgrading using #0 / #1 and #4 / #5 so I might just get another 5 years of use of them

 

[Doremus Scudder]

Let us know if you find any differences between the Ilford and Foma filters please. I'd sure like to know.

Doremus

 

[DREW WILEY]

Any colorhead works with any VC paper. Any magenta versus yellowish set of filters also works. There might be minor differences in terms of the alleged contrast grade you get with a specific filter, but it's rather silly to speak of discrete grades when a variable continuum is actually involved. All VC papers see green versus blue light. You can split print on any of them using deep green versus deep blue filters. But because magenta removes green from white light, and yellow removes blue, this method works too.

 

[BSP]

Update: I received my set of used Ilford filters and trimmed them to fit my filter draw.
Funny how the colors of these Ilford filters differ so much from their Foma counterparts on visual inspection.
Will be printing with both sets coming weekend.

 

[Doremus Scudder]

... Funny how the colors of these Ilford filters differ so much from their Foma counterparts on visual inspection.
...

The Ilford Multigrade filters are "speed-matched," meaning that exposure for a particular mid-tone value remains the same for all filters except the two strongest magenta filters, which are calibrated to need one stop more exposure. What this means is that most of the filters have varying amounts of neutral density built in order to adjust the exposure times. "Neutral density" for multigrade papers is roughly equal parts of blue and green (red isn't needed since the paper is blind to red). This changes the colors of the Ilford filter set from simple attenuation filters that just filter out blue or green in varying amounts and which are progressive shades of yellow and magenta respectively. The Foma filters are likely the latter and will require some change in exposure when you switch filters. FWIW, I prefer the latter approach.

Best

Doremus

 

[BSP]

A Foma filter change indeed requires a change of exposure.

For me this is not problematic as most of my printing is done using split-grading which of course always needs different exposures for the high and low contast filters involved.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Every negative is a little different problem when you get to fine-tuning the look of the final print. And specific papers vary even with the same manufacturer, and with changes of developer, even developing time. There are a lot of variables, and a huge book could be published trying to describe how to navigate all this, and it would obsolete the day it came out because some new paper or developer tweak would hit the market. Just get accustomed to your own gear. I happen to have multiple enlargers differently equipped, and can comfortably print any brand of VC paper on any of them to a very high standard of quality. But a basic test strip will instantly tell me if I'm headed the right direction or not. Trying to standardize printing times might be convenient for some people; but to me it seems irrelevant.

 

[BSP]

For the ultimate in predicability, standardization and speed of operation I used to have a digital camera and a development computer with ready-made presets...so much less variables involved

 

[DREW WILEY]

Why detour to a whole other racetrack (digital), with a bunch of unnecessary hurdles interposed, when the horses are already lined up to race on a different track? How on earth do you quantify all the variables? If you're a commercial lab just wanting to crank out garden-variety prints, there are already programmed options for their automated kind of machines. Real quality requires appreciating every single neg as its own problem. I want to assess the result of each step on the final printing paper itself, with my own eyes. And that's actually far faster and easier to do than trying to come up with endless programs that never can, and never will, address all the relevant variables.

 

[BSP]

+1

 

[DREW WILEY]

The problem with all those automated VC heads and cc comparisons between different standards is that filters aren't a constant. If they're dichroic coated glass filters, they don't fade per se, but they do accumulate grime over time, or can spall off bits of coating after years of hard usage or overheating. Diffusion chambers also need periodic checking for discoloration. If there is a feedback loop involved, that itself is likely to contain little filters that tend to get dirty and need periodic careful cleaning.

 

[DREW WILEY]

BSP - I heartily recommend having digital cameras on hand when going out taking black and white shots. For one thing, if you have several of them, they're useful for putting into a mesh bag and attaching it to a hook beneath your tripod, to add extra weight and stability when real rocks are not around. And now that there are even more compact options like flat smartphones, if you get bored while waiting for the light, these devices are excellent for skipping across ponds if flat pebbles are unavailable.

 

[summicron1]

FWIW -- I've been using a set of Durst filter I bought in 1975 on every sort of multi-grade paper I've ever bought -- now always Ilford -- and always got good results by the usual "let's see what this does?" method.

It really is the only way.

 

[Zathras]

BSP - I heartily recommend having digital cameras on hand when going out taking black and white shots. For one thing, if you have several of them, they're useful for putting into a mesh bag and attaching it to a hook beneath your tripod, to add extra weight and stability when real rocks are not around. And now that there are even more compact options like flat smartphones, if you get bored while waiting for the light, these devices are excellent for skipping across ponds if flat pebbles are unavailable.

 

[BSP]

After quite some time spent with Ilford contrast filters I have really come to appreciate the Ilford filters forr lengthening my exposure times a bit due to the built in ND-filters that even out differences between filters and easier switching (with no recalculations involved, and more steps in between) to a lower or higher contrast grade when printing single-grade of easy negatives.

For split-grading they work the same for me as Foma-filters.

I have found that my beloved Foma papers respond great to these Ilford filters, as most of you expected no doubt.