With RC, what about DIPs - developer-incorporated papers?
It has always been my understanding that these must be developed to a fixed time, no more, no less. Very little variation allowed, in fact almost no variation at all, maybe at most +/- 2%-3%.
It may well be that in my old (post 70 years) age, I've got sloppier with my paper development, but over the decades I've found RC papers have 'progressed' (tongue in cheek term) from being fairly variable in contrast by altering exposures and development, to a 'one size fits all' product in which you have to develop to a fixed time and that's it. Too little time in the developer, you get mostly muddy grays. Too long, equally muddy dark grays.
In the long ago days quite a bit of contrast could be 'influenced' by diluting developers. Not so much now, other than the aforementioned muddy tones varying from light to dark grays.
Basically, in my experience with DIPs, time and temperature appear to be not only irrelevant, but also unimportant.
As a sort of disclaimer, I have to say that in the past decade, I've mostly printed with old (all kept refrigerated, but mostly dating from the mid 1990s to mid 2000s) Kodabromide/Kodabrome (FB and RC) and Ilford Multigrade III and IV. I keep a slowly dwindling but still sizable (and alas, dwindling all too quickly) stock of 11x14 and 16x20 Ilford Galerie FB (bought in 2000 from a photo studio) and a several boxes of 8x10 Ilford Multigrade FB I got in 1991 or 1992. All in original sealed boxes, refrigerated, and showing almost no contrast changes or shift. On the other hand RC paper purchased this year still stubbornly refuses to vary its contrast much beyond excessive whites or blacks with very little change in mid tones however much filtration I throw at it. Ditto the (also fresh) European RC papers which, although exhibiting very pleasant mid tones, I've found difficult to get any contrast changes from. Note the latter two are VC.
The filtration systems on my two enlargers (Leitz and LPL) were changed and new filters installed (at great expense) in 2015, along with all lights. Occasionally as a change in pace and technique I also print with a set of below-the-lens Ilford Multigrade filters (bought new in 2016) on an elderly Durst 66 enlarger I have (also with a new light). So all my lights and contrast filters are recent, not old.
Developers are Ilford Multigrade (an aggressive developer) and PQ Universal (which I prefer) and on occasion, Kodak Dektol, diluted as recommended. I prefer Dektol tones overall but PQ is by far easiest to work with.
I prefer to not change print developers at this stage, as I now no longer mix my own brews from basic chems.
As mentioned, all my papers are carefully sealed against humidity and refrigerated in a frost free unit at a uniform temperature. I've maintained this for years. On occasion I give paper to friends who print and they tell me exactly the same as I've written in this post.
Am I/are we just old duffers who are stuck in old-fashioned printing ways? Or do the developer-incorporated RC papers significantly dampen print contrast?
Your thoughts, please. I remain as always, open to experimentation in the darkroom, but find I'm in need of inspiration.