Opinions on Illford MGIV RC

[dlofgreen]

I have just tried this paper and I don't know if I like it very much or if I need to re-learn how to print on it. It seems that it is very sensitive but also wants to flaten out the image. What I mean is my prints will not have very much contrast. I print it with yellow filters but when I crank it up to get the contrast I like, the shadows are lost to any detail they had.

Do any of you use this paper? What are your thoughts on it? Should I be trying something different when printing this paper?

Thanks,
D.

 

[beethamd]

Hi - does the negative look nice and contrasty under a loupe?

Do you use one of the Ilford Multigrade filter sets? If so, try a test print with lots of different grades. Block off most of the print with cardboard and expose different parts of your print to different grade filters.

The other thing to do is to maybe get the balance right for most of the print and dodge the shadows a bit.

Also check your dev temperature.

Do you have a scan we could see?

 

[dlofgreen]

It's not a thin neg or a safe light gone bad (I did a safe light test) and all seems good there. The filter set I have is a used one that some one threw in with some other ebay stuff I bought. They are Ilford Cibachrome-A filters. Are those for color or BW?

Here is the difference I am seeing between the Kodak paper I used to use and the Illford paper.

 

[jaap]

I think Ilford multigrade 4 is a fantastic paper that's the RC and the FB.For the nicest pictures you should try to print on grade 2 that's without a filter. You should develop your films for a time that gives a nice contrast on grade2. For more shadow detail you must expose your film accurate. In most cases you will find that the film speed needs to devide a factor 2 That is expose a Tmax 400 as if it's a ISO 200 film. This is in a nudshell the how to get fine prints. If you want to know more about it I can recomment the books from Ansel Adams. The camera the negative and the print. If you hold on to a few rules the work in the darkroom will get easy and very joyfull. Good luck!

 

[f/stopblues]

I've also had good luck with the Ilford MGIV RC paper when using the filter set. The filters made a world of difference once I started using those and learned how to do split-grade printing. The Portfolio paper they offer is especially nice. The emulsion is the same, but its on a thicker tag paper that makes for a better feel (to my hands anyway).

But yes, seems to be a well-rounded paper. Get the Ilford filters and play with those and you'll be pleasantly suprised.

 

[beethamd]

D,
Print without the filter on a small test strip to see if you can reproduce the skin tone on the face - either stop down a bit or shorten the exposure. I usually start with f/8 or f/11 at 12 seconds - without a multigrade filter - for a normal negative and a 10 X 8 print - and then play about around with the contrast filters.

In the Ilford Multigrade set I have, yellow gives low contrast and magenta, high contrast. No filter is just like grade 2. Let me know how that works out.

David.

 

[Branestawm]

Cibachrome was the forerunner to Ilfochrome which is (or was, don't know if they still make it) a process for making colour prints from slides. Sounds like you have got a set of filters for this. Ilford supply filters to fit either in the filter drawer of the enlarger or below the lens but they are not cheap. UK price is about £20 for the 3" up to £40 for the below lens set.

 

[xcapekey]

i agree...get the ilford color filters...BUT

if you're using a diffusion enlarger with a color head (ie omega chromegratrol with dials for cyan, magenta, yellow)...i would try using just the magenta dial....zero everything down except for the magenta...i find that 40pts magenta is about a 2.....about 55-65 points is about a 3...etc.,

 

[Fred]

If you have a colour enlarger, you can use the settings in the fact sheet with the paper (or off the web). Just set the M and Y filters to the grade you want.

Looking at the posts of Kodak v Ilford, it does look (on my monitor at least) that the Ilford paper exposure is about a third to half the time too long. Stop down the enlarger lens a tad.

MGIV is fine paper, although I guess not to everyones taste.

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

I used this paper a lot, and even still have a pack of it in the fridge.

I am very rusty on my darkroom skills, but you're experiencing the typical novice problem with contrasty negatives. What you should do is spread your print exposure into three: one for the shadows, another for the highlights, and then another one without any filters at all.

I forgot exactly what the sequence is, but let's say it's something like this: if your total exposure is going to be 10 seconds, then expose about four seconds without a single filter; then about three seconds with a #4 filter (it's magenta), then about three seconds with a #1.5 or #1 filter (it's yellow).

I did this with much success (if this is the right sequence; it was about two or three years ago since I last stepped into a darkroom) when trying to bring out both highlight and shadow details with "problematic" negatives. I recommend you do your own tests yourself.

It all depends on your negative and how much detail you can and want out of the highlights and/or shadows.

I hope somebody with current knowledge of darkroom printing techniques can chime in or correct/add to what I've said. But that's the basic idea.

You're basically doing the analog version of tweaking "curves" on different layers and merging on Photoshop, if you need to understand that way, what you're doing with this method.

 

[dlofgreen]

I don't have a color enlarger. I have the omega b22 with all of the condenser lenses. The filters I have are yellow, cyan, and megenta. All are graded from .05 to .5, what would translate to a #2, 3, etc. grade?

Fred, When I shorten the exposure time the contrast doesn't change it all gets lighter but with no change in contrast.

Thanks,
D.

 

[dlofgreen]

the package says "pearl"

D.

 

[ddutchison]

Hi dlofgreen,

The filters you have are for an old colour printing system and not intended for B&W photography at all. They are the wrong filters to use with Multigrade B&W and will produce poor results.

What you need to use are the current Ilford Multigrade filter set. Ask at your local camera store, or look on ebay. The set I have cost about $25 Cdn,. so they're not that expensive (essential though, if you want more than one contrast range with Multigrade).

Check out Ilfords web site. Scroll about half way down this page and look for the "Contrast Control" .pdf file, it'll explain how to use the filters. Lots of other useful info on that page too.

Best of luck

 

[markinlondon]

Hi, D.

I'll add another vote for the right filter set. Also, if you want a punchier presentation try the MGIV Cooltone paper, it has a whiter base and gives cleaner highlights than the "vanilla" MGIV. The same negative seems to need about a half grade lower filtration for the same results.

Mark

 

[dlofgreen]

Thanks guys, I will go to the camera shop today and get a set. I will let you know what I come up with. Thanks for all the advice.

D.

 

[GeneW]

Question re Ilford filter set: I have an old set of Kodak Polycontrast filters. Are the Ilford ones different or are the Kodak ones interchangeable? Do the Ilford filters come in a size that can be cut to custom fit the filter drawer of the enlarger?

Gene