Why is 98% of all paper available VC?

[Mainecoonmaniac]

That's his belief

That's ridiculous. Same old crap from people who think they can "build" negatives.

I've heard a lot of good things about Brooks. But I've heard they're pretty dogmatic about photography. I assume "Build" is testing the ASA of the film then process accordingly until the negative matches the paper grade. I haven't printed on graded paper in decades and VC paper is still my choice. It is old crap. Dogmatic crap.

 

[Xmas]

If your name is ansell and you are using cut film or plates and have time to meter for zone 1 and highlights then you could print on grade 2.

With 36 or even 12 frames it is more difficult...

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

Even then...

If your name is ansell and you are using cut film or plates and have time to meter for zone 1 and highlights then you could print on grade 2.

With 36 or even 12 frames it is more difficult...

He'd use Dr. Beers paper developer to change his grades. I prefer 1 paper developer and 1 box of paper.

 

[Xmas]

He'd use Dr. Beers paper developer to change his grades. I prefer 1 paper developer and 1 box of paper.

You left out the colour head enlarger source

 

[Vaughn]

As I see it...One reason graded papers held out so long against VC papers was that graded papers had a wider range of surfaces and colors than the VC papers. Slowly the surface choices of graded paper disappeared, then graded paper itself. Slowly the VC papers were offered in a larger variety of surfaces and colors (warm, cool, neutral), replacing the graded papers.

If there was a VC paper with the same surface and color (and toning qualities) as Portriga Rapid 111, I would have used it. Instead, I aimed my negatives to print on Grade 2, but usually hit grade 3 (it went grades 1, 2, and 3).

Now I print carbon and platinum, so I can vary the paper color and contrast myself.

 

[EdSawyer]

I still like graded papers better. They were the "halo" product for paper manufacturers back in the day. Their best papers were always graded stuff, not VC.

 

[RobC]

There would be outrage if Ilford stopped producing Ilfobrom Galerie. It is considered their premiere paper by a lot of traditional printers and perhaps Ilford themselves too.

 

[cliveh]

The trick to using VC papers is to use them with zero filtration.

 

[chip j]

I love Galerie, I think it's unique, but w/o grade 1 I can't produce a beautiful, consistent set of prints to sell. So, the hell w/Ilford; I'll use Foma! BTW, back in the "Day", paper was cheap enough to stock in diff. grades!

 

[DREW WILEY]

I suspect that it is more cost-effective to make VC papers than traditional graded, esp with respect to how much silver is actually needed to
make something with guts to it. For certain things I do miss the superb graded papers of the past, like real Seagull G (not the anemic redux
products), Brilliant Bromide, Portriga, etc. The problem back then is that VC papers weren't all that good. But now some of them are superb. MGWT, for example, can compete with any graded paper ever made for sheer impact. But it is warm toned. And when working with small negs in particular, like 120 film, it is simply not possible to individually develop each frame for ideal contrast like one can with sheet film. I keep a variety of papers on hand: several distinct flavors of Ilford products, including MGWT, Classic, and Cooltone, plus some leftovever MGIV and Kentmere Fineprint. I have a stash of EMaks graded. But for a cool graded I've just gotten in some Gr 3 Ilfobrom. I'm
eager to see what it does since I haven't used it for many years, and now know a helluva lot of tricks I'd didn't back then. The other day I
stumbled onto some old prints I'd done with it and they're pretty rich. There's no silver bullet out there. You need different ammo for different critters.

 

[Vaughn]

I remember an article/research that was done many many years ago. The author tested a variety of papers for the their maximum black and for the silver content of the paper. What was interesting was that there was no one-to-one correlation between the two.

 

[ic-racer]

I always thought graded paper had more guts.

Like longer intestines?

 

[chip j]

Like longer intestines?

Your intestines are in your skull.

 

[Roger Cole]

Huh?

Saying a paper has "more guts" really makes no sense. What the heck does that even mean? More contrast? Higher D-max? It's a bloody mess?

 

[chip j]

Stronger tonality, my boy.

 

[Roger Cole]

"Stronger?"

Higher D-Max? Lower D-Min? Both, giving a wider range between D-Max and D-Min?

 

[Rick A]

I think that all those who chimed in on this, who have never really printed on graded paper (I'm not saying made a few prints on the stuff, but who have not put heart and soul into learning graded)need to buy one grade of paper, buy two or three developers, and put out a concerted effort to learn what it takes to really extract all there is from a single grade of paper. Then, maybe, they can understand what printing is really about, and stop relying on parroted internet myth. I still love and use graded paper, but not nearly as often as I use multi-grade(VC)paper. I made the switch for economic reasons, and because modern VC paper has attained a very high quality, nearly equaling, if not surpassing single grades. This has made it easier to account for "fudged" exposures, and sloppy work(I can make up for it with printing). I challenge all of you to slip on the "straight jacket" of learning to expose for and using, one single grade of paper(your choice of brand).

 

[georg16nik]

The modern single grades became crappier (we are left with the crappy ones) compared to the ones we've had 30 years ago, hence modern VC (while no doubt progressed) now “appear” as equal if not better.
Internet is filled with folks without much experience in fine printing fixed grade vs VC, Condenser vs Diffuser heads, 30 years ago vs today.

... because modern VC paper has attained a very high quality, nearly equaling, if not surpassing single grades....

 

[RobC]

Ilfobrom Galerie is a bromide paper so has other qualities apart from being FB and graded.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

I think that all those who chimed in on this, who have never really printed on graded paper (I'm not saying made a few prints on the stuff, but who have not put heart and soul into learning graded)need to buy one grade of paper, buy two or three developers, and put out a concerted effort to learn what it takes to really extract all there is from a single grade of paper. Then, maybe, they can understand what printing is really about, and stop relying on parroted internet myth. I still love and use graded paper, but not nearly as often as I use multi-grade(VC)paper. I made the switch for economic reasons, and because modern VC paper has attained a very high quality, nearly equaling, if not surpassing single grades. This has made it easier to account for "fudged" exposures, and sloppy work(I can make up for it with printing). I challenge all of you to slip on the "straight jacket" of learning to expose for and using, one single grade of paper(your choice of brand).

Why should we be forced into using a single, inflexible tool? The old adage comes to mind "everything looks like a nail when all you have is a hammer". Yes, forcing you to print everything to grade 2 will instill some discipline in making negatives, but let's face it, the world doesn't exist in grade 2. You can't always photograph scenes that fit nicely on a grade 2 curve, no matter how much you manipulate the exposure and processing. And to even get close, you'd have to shoot sheet film and go back to hand-processing each individual sheet. When I print platinum/palladium, gum bichromate, or several other alternative processes, they're not limited to a single grade - I can tweak my paper on a print-by-print basis to get what I want and need for the look of the image I'm trying to make. That's hardly lazy or sloppy.

 

[RobC]

Homogenisation is the name of the game for the big manufacturers. When there is no competition they can get away with it. That is why monopolies are so hated, they dictate what you can have and in a niche market with few players this is what happens.

 

[RobC]

How do we know it is a bromide paper?

Why do you suppose its called Ilfobrom Galerie?

 

[RobC]

well maybe Simon Galley can confirm or otherwise if it is a pure bromide paper. I have always believed it to be.

 

[chip j]

Agree with Roger. Somebody please define "stronger tonality". Actually, we should start with "tonality", which is simply the characteristic curve of the paper.

More solid blacks, grays, & whites, I believe.

 

[DREW WILEY]

I've printed on almost all of the classic graded papers of my generation. Brilliant Bromide, original Seagull G, Ilfobrom, Portriga. Then I've got
prints from my brother going well before that into DuPont papers etc. A I've tried all sorts of perhaps less stellar papers, both graded and
VC. And I've worked with all kinds of developers and large format films. You match the shoe to the foot and not visa versa, the paper to the
neg and how you want it to look, and not visa versa. So I have I confidently state that some of todays VC papers are not just inevitable
manufacturing compromises, but truly superb papers. No web chatter form me. I mean it, and it can easily be seen in the prints themselves. But I certainly do miss some of those old premium graded papers for certain applications. There are certain niches in look or image tone that are difficult to fill with today's paper selection. There are other niches easier to fill. As per Ilfobrom Galerie, I haven't used
it in a long time; but back then it was not strictly a Bromide paper. I don't know about it's present formula. I've just had a box of it shipped
in, but given our current water restrictions due to severe drought, I'll have to carefully plan this year's black and white printing sessions.
I do most of that in the winter rainy season, when water is locally abundant.