Who Made the J&C Papers

Well, I had three grades of Cachet Expo--2, 3 and 4--which Freestyle acknowledges to be the same as Emaks, and I've used Nuance "normal", which Freestyle also acknowledges to be Emaks and corresponds to G3 according to John from J&C, and I've used G2 Emaks, which seems to be the same paper as my G2 Cachet Expo. Who knows, maybe there are some strange batches out there, but I've made prints on the paper and have gone from one grade to the next with the same negative and observed my exposure times, so to me that seems like data.

If you have doubts about the provenance of Cachet Expo RF and J&C Nuance, you could order a few 25-sheet packs of grades 2, 3, and 4 Emaks for $15 a piece from Freestyle and test them yourself to find out what speeds they are, since there is nothing in your "files" regarding grade 4.

You don't seem to have any real interest in making prints with this material. Why does it concern you so much?

Zvonimir--The Fotokemika website lists three grades (1, 2, 3) and four surfaces in DW (glossy, mat, silk, and crystal) as well as SW glossy, and RC glossy versions of Emaks, and quite a wide range of paper sizes. Do all those surfaces and sizes really exist? What is the "crystal" surface--extra glossy?

David A. Goldfarb said:

Well, I had three grades of Cachet Expo--2, 3 and 4--which Freestyle acknowledges to be the same as Emaks, and I've used Nuance "normal", which Freestyle also acknowledges to be Emaks and corresponds to G3 according to John from J&C, and I've used G2 Emaks, which seems to be the same paper as my G2 Cachet Expo. Who knows, maybe there are some strange batches out there, but I've made prints on the paper and have gone from one grade to the next with the same negative and observed my exposure times, so to me that seems like data.

Click to expand...

While I generally think Freestyle is pretty upfront (when asked directly) it is possible that the complete details were not provided... I cannot locate any Cachet Expo paper at the freestyle site... it keeps leading me to EFKE Emaks, which they explain, sort of, that Efke makes grades 1-3, but that they in their infinate wisdom, relabel as grade 4 for us US, since they think that is closer to the "U.S. contrast grade standards".

In otherwords, the paper labled Efke Emaks grade 4, sold by freestyle, is Efke's grade 3 paper... which is given a speed rating of 50 on Efkes datasheet, as well as on Freestyles data sheet under the name "Emaks 4"... Both the Freestyle ISO-P data and the curve on Fotokemika's data sheet agree that the speed of the highest contrast material, is slower.

While our friend from Croatia says all 3 papers have a different speed, both the freestyle data and the graphs suggest that the 2 lower grades have substantially the same speed and that the higher contrast paper, is slower.

If you have a packet of Cachet Expo grade 4, and it is faster than Cachet Expo grade 2 and 3, then perhaps it is not the same as Efke Emaks 4, also known as Emaks 3, not that I care.

On the other hand, if you have bought this Efke Emaks 4 product sold by Freestyle, and find that the speed of the grade 4 item to be faster than the lower contrast papers, perhaps someone somewhere is mislabeling something, or Efke changed their product without sufficient announcemet - I don't know.

David A. Goldfarb said:

If you have doubts about the provenance of Cachet Expo RF and J&C Nuance, you could order a few 25-sheet packs of grades 2, 3, and 4 Emaks for $15 a piece from Freestyle and test them yourself to find out what speeds they are, since there is nothing in your "files" regarding grade 4.

Click to expand...

What I do not understand is why you keep flip-floping between names of the different companies. Can we settle on just Efke, Emaks?

David A. Goldfarb said:

You don't seem to have any real interest in making prints with this material. Why does it concern you so much?

Click to expand...

Correct.
I make my own emulsions for my own use and I guess it is this interest that drives my curiosity. I may have said that grade 4 was two stops slower but this may be incorrect; I was only taking a rough guess looking at the curves... Freestyle data states clearly it is one stop slower.

Anyway, this part of the thread is tedious and I imagine is getting on the nerves of others as well, so since it is mostly me pushing this forward, I will stop.

However, if you or anyone buying the Freestyle product finds the grade "4" to be FASTER than grades 2 or 3, I encourage them to post their results here, as that would mean something is up.

Peace,

Ray

Ray Rogers said:

(Hummm...
Like Magic, My post does not appear; I will retype!)

Zvonimir,

Yes you are correct.

It was claimed that a paper, called Emaks grade 4
was faster by 2 stops than the other papers in that line.

This did not sound familiar to me,　so I checked my files and
an Emaks 3 paper was found that is about TWO STOPS SLOWER than the other Emaks papers,
but no Emaks 4
and no Emaks "high contrast" paper that is 2 stops FASTER than the other Emaks...

So until someone can point to data showing that there is or was, a Grade 4 Emaks paper that is both labled "Emaks 4" and is faster than other Emaks'...

I will have to write this notion off as a myth.

As it would be sad for truth to be mislabled "Myth",　If someone knows better, please speak up.

Ray


PS,　Zvonimir, I envy your close proximity to a photo manufacturer!
What is the local area like? Is English or German generally understood?
What is there in the way of sight seeing?

Click to expand...

Hi Ray,

I have to admit I'm amateur and still learning all about traditional wet printing so I can't say for sure how fast is paper in stops or how many stop difference are between different grades. All I can say that difference between Soft and Normal is bigger than difference between Normal and Hard grades. Like I said I know for Soft, Normal and Hard Emaks, never heard for some other grade.
There is possibility Fotokemika had more than 3 grades in some ancient history so fell free to call it a myth.

Don't envy me. Almost all they produce are for export. If I want to buy something I have to order it and wait for some foreign big order. If something left from the lot they will leave it for me. I could wait from few weeks to few months for the supply. Usually they have Efke film on the shelf but papers are different story.

In Croatia school education most popular foreign language is English followed by German. Can't say for sure what language they speak but fell free to call them, tel. number is +385 1 336 11 33.

Fotokemika factory was located in Zagreb about decade ago, moved to Samobor since post-war new order and planing. I guess nobody believed Fotokemika will continue to exist since digital age so they are not in fancy and luxury building. It is small factory hided in a local vegetation with some old rusty Fotokemika plate at entrance, working hardly and be proud not to depend on Croatian economy.

Zvonimir Ervacic said:

All I can say that difference between Soft and Normal is bigger than difference between Normal and Hard grades.

Click to expand...

Humm... that does not agree with the data sheets either!
While I have no opinion myself, never having used it, I find it strange that the data sheets read differently... now I am starting to wonder if perhaps the
"key" to the graphs might not be wrong....　I am now really starting to get confused. What you describe, and what David has been saying, might be explained by a mislabled graph.... I keep thinking it might be me, but I checked it again (and again) and that doesn't seem to be the case.

Ray

with Apologies to Captain Kirk...

Ray Rogers said:

Humm... that does not agree with the data sheets either!
While I have no opinion myself, never having used it, I find it strange that the data sheets read differently... now I am starting to wonder if perhaps the
"key" to the graphs might not be wrong....　I am now really starting to get confused. What you describe, and what David has been saying, might be explained by a mislabled graph.... I keep thinking it might be me, but I checked it again (and again) and that doesn't seem to be the case.

Ray

Click to expand...

Ray-

If the key to the graphs were wrong, then the relationship between slope and contrast would be out of sync and that isn't the case.
If the material being sold doesn't follow the published data, then perhaps the material being sold... is different.

The fact that Paper is only available infrequently, and may not be described well by the datasheets... might indicate that Fotokemika are not manufacturing that paper there any more, but just cutting up ("converting") a paper made elsewhere.

It may come down to testing after all!

RR

Ray Rogers said:

Humm... that does not agree with the data sheets either!
While I have no opinion myself, never having used it, I find it strange that the data sheets read differently... now I am starting to wonder if perhaps the
"key" to the graphs might not be wrong....　I am now really starting to get confused. What you describe, and what David has been saying, might be explained by a mislabled graph.... I keep thinking it might be me, but I checked it again (and again) and that doesn't seem to be the case.

Ray

Click to expand...

Hi Ray.

Sorry, I was talking about contrast difference, not speed. My Emaks Soft is for US market cut to different (bigger) size than Normal and Hard. In my "test" enlarger head was at higher distance than for Normal and Hard grade. It was not a real test, only to se how the same negative look on each paper. Now I start with Normal paper and use Hard or Soft if I need it.

I don't know about speed, never was interested for that information.

Regards,
Zvonimir

Zvonimir Ervacic said:

Hi Ray.

Sorry, I was talking about contrast difference, not speed. My Emaks Soft is for US market cut to different (bigger) size than Normal and Hard. In my "test" enlarger head was at higher distance than for Normal and Hard grade. It was not a real test, only to se how the same negative look on each paper. Now I start with Normal paper and use Hard or Soft if I need it.

I don't know about speed, never was interested for that information.

Regards,
Zvonimir

Click to expand...

OK, Thanks, Zvonimir.

Ray

Ray Rogers said:

OK, Thanks, Zvonimir.

Ray

Click to expand...

Sorry for asking Ray but why is speed so important?

Regards,
Zvonimir

Zvonimir Ervacic said:

Sorry for asking Ray but why is speed so important?

Regards,
Zvonimir

Click to expand...

Zvonimir,

In many cases it really doesn't matter a whole lot.

In special cases, where you are printing a large number of prints, it may be preferrable to use a fast paper, especially if the prints are large. On the otherhand, if you need or want to do a lot of manipulation such as dodging and burning in, etc., a slow paper allows you to do more, or more finely tuned manipulations and the print is more forgiving of errors.

The reason I am interested in the speed issue however, is that I know from experience, higher contrast papers (emulsions in general) tend to be the slower emulsions.

Since someone had mentioned that this was not true for the Emaks paper, (despite the fact that the official data says it is) I wanted to know more and hopefully, figure out which was closest to the truth... and why.

For me, it is mostly an issue of design... not the speed itself, but the decision made by the mfg. as to how fast the emulsion should be...
I guess you could say I am really more interested in the "Why?" rather than in the "How much?"

So to answer you question, the exact speed doesn't really mater, but I would expect the data and the actual properties to agree at least in "gist".

Ray

Just as an aside, there are two ways to build varying contrast grades. One involves rotating the curve on a pivot that is the toe. This emulsion set has the same "speed" in terms of real sensitivity, but varies in the mid tones and therefore has a different "speed" on-easel.

Another is to build a set of curves that pivot on the mid tone thereby giving a family of curves that have different real speed, but appear to have the same speed on-easel.

The first method uses one emulsion and different methods of final finish and addenda and the second method involves a different emulsion formula for each grade. Some companies take the first route for economy and others take the second route. It is more expensive, in that you need 5 formulas for 5 grades, but it is so much easier for the darkroom worker.

PE

Photo Engineer said:

Just as an aside, there are two ways to build varying contrast grades. One involves rotating the curve on a pivot that is the toe. This emulsion set has the same "speed" in terms of real sensitivity, but varies in the mid tones and therefore has a different "speed" on-easel.

Another is to build a set of curves that pivot on the mid tone thereby giving a family of curves that have different real speed, but appear to have the same speed on-easel.

The first method uses one emulsion and different methods of final finish and addenda and the second method involves a different emulsion formula for each grade. Some companies take the first route for economy and others take the second route. It is more expensive, in that you need 5 formulas for 5 grades, but it is so much easier for the darkroom worker.

PE

Click to expand...

I am not too sure about the first method you mentioned.
Can you give a real product example from each category?

It would seem that since paper speed is determined using a midtone speed point (H = 0.6 above b+f) that the easel speed should be accounted for....

What you describe sounds more true for Negative speed, which based on a toe speed point (M = 0.1 above b+f).
Math, however, is not my Forte (photographic pun!)

Perhaps 0.6 is still considered "toe"?

I really don't know; it looks kind of low mid-tone to me.

???

But yes, there are those different methods you mentioned. I think even with the different formulas, it still depends on if you [the manufacturer] go the extra mile to consolidate the speeds of if you leave them as they fall naturally.

It does make it easier and more economical for the printer, but on the other hand, if you know the speed difference between the two, it takes only a few seconds to derrive a new exposure time.... close enough to put you back in the game anyway.

Ray

Well, you are right about the measure for speed, but I am talking about the method of making graded papers. That is all. And, nevertheless, manufacturers differ in methods of manufacture/formulation. This is reflected in different paper speeds. There have been publications on this with VC papers by Dickinson and Zawadski in an example. It does not go into it in detail but does illustrate the situation to some extent.

But, it is mainly a case of "everybody knows" within the industry. I'm merely telling you about it.

PE

Photo Engineer said:

Well, you are right about the measure for speed, but I am talking about the method of making graded papers. That is all. And, nevertheless, manufacturers differ in methods of manufacture/formulation. This is reflected in different paper speeds. There have been publications on this with VC papers by Dickinson and Zawadski in an example. It does not go into it in detail but does illustrate the situation to some extent.
PE

Click to expand...

A real life example of products made fitting your description in the earlier post would be informative and make it easier to see things clearly.

Dickinson and Zawadski would be fun to read. Does anyone know where this article is? I think it might have been in a popular publication, Darkroom something or other... anyone know for sure or better, have a copy ?

Photo Engineer said:

...it is mainly a case of "everybody knows" within the industry.
I'm merely telling you about it.

PE

Click to expand...

So True.
I must be a very ugly looking monster... since I am All Ears!

Well Ray, I have personally made paper emulsions using both methods. What else can I say.

In fact, my enlarging emulsion uses the one method. I have not bothered to use the other method as it is too intensive for the student in a short workshop to make a new emulsion for each grade, but I tell them how it can be done.

PE

Photo Engineer said:

Well Ray, I have personally made paper emulsions using both methods.
PE

Click to expand...

Its OK.
I guess I was just reaching for curves to look at, to see how they compare to each other.

Ray

Dickinson and Zawadski. Photo Techniques, about 2 - 4 years ago. It is only approximate as they compared VC papers IIRC.

PE

Photo Engineer said:

Dickinson and Zawadski. Photo Techniques, about 2 - 4 years ago. It is only approximate as they compared VC papers IIRC.

PE

Click to expand...

That's right.

Photo Techniques, not Darkroom Techniques

Last time I checked this mag was not avail. here; I will check the libraries here anew, but if someone can scan it to me that works as well!

Ray

Sure, if they wish to violate copyright.

PE

The thin line between USE and ABUSE...

Photo Engineer said:

Sure, if they wish to violate copyright.

PE

Click to expand...

???
Does it violate copyright law to copy indivudial atricles, for personal, educational use, non commercially?

I really don't know.

But to stand in the way of a "reasonable" flow of information is un-American, un-Democratic and un-Wise in my uninspired opinion!

The authors and the publishers have only two choices/options:
either I (and many others) can get access to their work freely for personal use/study through library collections etc. or their work will be unseen by many people.

I will not buy an international subscription to a magazine I have never seen and do not want, just to get a single article, that I may not even like!

The loss of indivudal freedoms like this is a poor substitute for true protection of a persons creation.

I do not know the details of the copy-right law, but I think this comes under the category of victem-less crime. Either I see it for free or I don't see it at all. The authors/publishers won't make a nickle out of me either way.

I think copyright protection is an important issue,
but this is silly.

We need to stand up for a certain amout of freedom when it come to things like this.

Did you know that if I travel between some countries frequently, I can lose the ability to view certain DVDs due to some short sighted regulation built into computers?

Did you know I can buy a DVD, but cannot copy it to a smaller more portable format, for my own viewing? Even though I "own" the DVD, and both players!

Modern technology has been designed to prevent criminal use BEFORE it happens, rather than to punish abusers.

That sounds good if you are a fat business, but when you see how personal freedom is being restricted, and how even the nature of the meaning of "ownership" is changing, to "usership rights" it doesn't smell quite as sweet!

Ray

I was not suggesting anyone break any law or deprive anyone of income they are entitled to.
I am not even sure it really would be illegal.
If it is, and it is in fact a bad law, civil disobedience that leads to change has the ability to create heros out of a group of lowly criminals....

Arbeit Macht Frei?
Nein, aber doch, Civil Disobedience Will Set You Free!

It's legal to copy sections from a book or magazine for research purposes, or private use. You can't freely distribute them though, so they can't be made available for download etc without the authors/publishers permission, unless of course Copyright has expired. Public and academic libraries will allow you to do this.

So what your asking for Ray is totally legal and ethical.

Ian

Thanks Ian.

It is getting kind of strange... I can download an article from a magazine... for free, if I am physically at a Library, but not if I leave the building. Now, I do not pay the library to use it. And I do not pay for the free download.
Who do I pay? I pay the bus driver who drives me to the library.
Good system!

I was being a bit tongue in cheek really, because sort of the same thoughts as Ray posted above went through my mind. Which piper do you pay and which one do you dance to?

PE