Fibre Paper Choices

[Colin Corneau]

Ilford's new Art 300 is pretty lovely, but the surface texture is not suited to every subject or image. When it fits, it's great stuff but it's an effect that doesn't work for every image.

It does float much more than other papers due to the base, I remember hearing.

I think I am settling on Ilford's Warmtone VC-FB and Oriental Seagull for its briliant white base...both worth investigating for you.

 

[Roger Hicks]

What sort of cold light head have you? Many old ones are very blue and therefore do not work well with ANY variable-contrast paper (I know -- I have a couple).

Frances and I were REALLY impressed with Art 300. Here's her review in Shutterbug: http://www.shutterbug.com/content/ilford-multigrade-art-300-new-exciting-multigrade-silver-paper

Cheers,

R.

 

[Turtle]

for glossy VC papers, Ilford MGWT and Adox MCC. I prefer both to Ilford MGIV by quite a margin.

 

[Trius]

Roger: I'm not sure what head(s) the community darkroom has, I will have to investigate. My own setup, now in storage, is a Beseler 45MX with an old Aristo head. So yes, that rig does not work well with VC papers. That's why I raised the point in the opening post. I'm not sure if there is any way around that. From the sound of things, I might need to update the light source for my own enlarger once I am able to build a new darkroom.

As for the Art 300, I read the review and was quite intrigued. I have a feeling that paper might end up being something I stock for specific negatives, but not my every day paper.

Turtle: Can you share why you prefer the Ilford to the Adox?

 

[sepiareverb]

What sort of cold light head have you? Many old ones are very blue and therefore do not work well with ANY variable-contrast paper...

Quite true, I'd forgotten that. My old Aristo single tube head was bad in this regard, but I had the Zone VI VC head for a while which had a remarkably small range of contrast- a grade and a half perhaps? Very small. Went to a lot of trouble to retrofit it to my Beseler 45 too.

Since switching to the LPL diffusion head I've not looked back. Huge range of contrast there, and very easy to use. Even all my old negatives are quite printable with this machine.

As for the Art 300, I read the review and was quite intrigued. I have a feeling that paper might end up being something I stock for specific negatives, but not my every day paper.

Exactly my situation as well. I'm too enamored of that FB glossy surface.

 

[janosh]

I use Epson 3800 ABW driver and Epson pigments to print on Ilford Gold Fiber Silk (tone 12/12-14-14 to approximate classic Agfa Portriga Rapid) or I print on Crane Museo II when I want a true mat. Both readily equal silver paper tonally and are of course more sharp due to lack of enlarger optical loss. So far I've been unable to match platinum (eg Irving Penn) but of course silver can't do that either.

 

[Trius]

I will take a look at the LPL head.

One of the owners of Windsor Photo Outfitters (Ontario) is quite handy and developed an LED head capable of variable contrast. He never made it into a commercial product AFAIK, but I think I'll ping him at some point and see if he'd do a one-off.

 

[Trius]

Janosh: I would not be adverse to digital printing, but I don't particularly care for the scanning and post processing that would be required. Or maybe years of inhaling fixer has just addled my brain. 😀

 

[shadowfox]

• I will only use fibre paper. I don't care how good RC paper has gotten, I just don't like it, especially the feel. You may feel strongly otherwise, but don't bother trying to convince me! 😛

Well, if you're going to be difficult like that! 🙂

 

[Roger Hicks]

... From the sound of things, I might need to update the light source for my own enlarger once I am able to build a new darkroom.

I fear this may be the best answer.

I have both cold cathode and diffuser heads (true diffuser -- not condenser/diffuser) heads for my MPP 5x7 and I truly believe that there is less difference between them than is commonly maintained. In other words, the change from your existing cold cathode head to a full diffuser head may be no greater than the change from one cold cathode to another.

Condensers, let alone point sources, are another matter.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Trius]

Well, if you're going to be difficult like that! 🙂

Yes ... Trius here ...

I fear this may be the best answer.

I have both cold cathode and diffuser heads (true diffuser -- not condenser/diffuser) heads for my MPP 5x7 and I truly believe that there is less difference between them than is commonly maintained. In other words, the change from your existing cold cathode head to a full diffuser head may be no greater than the change from one cold cathode to another.

Condensers, let alone point sources, are another matter.

Cheers,

R.

Good to know there is little difference.

Thanks everyone for ALL the great input. A very civil thread indeed. 😀