sepiareverb
genius and moron
Another unique paper gone. The Foma 532/542, a paper capable of the richness of platinum prints discontinued. All the great Agfa papers- Portrigia, Insignia, Brovira gone, the most 'white bread' one (MC) being resurrected. Forte Polywarmtone & Fortezo gone, Kodak Azo, the Seagull of old. Years back a paper would be replaced, now they just go.
For all the difference the film makes to how an image looks, the paper can have just as much an effect. Without the range of papers available I fear silver prints will look more and more the same, becoming less and less desirable.
Digital isn't killing film, there are plenty of films around, many quite different from each other, but paper is dying. And when the wonderful range of silver papers is gone photography goes with it. Sorry, but an ink-jet print is not a fine print, it is a machine print. Craft is no longer important to the masses, who would rather just look at a 'picture' on a cell phone screen or on a computer screen.
For all the difference the film makes to how an image looks, the paper can have just as much an effect. Without the range of papers available I fear silver prints will look more and more the same, becoming less and less desirable.
Digital isn't killing film, there are plenty of films around, many quite different from each other, but paper is dying. And when the wonderful range of silver papers is gone photography goes with it. Sorry, but an ink-jet print is not a fine print, it is a machine print. Craft is no longer important to the masses, who would rather just look at a 'picture' on a cell phone screen or on a computer screen.
dnp
Member
I really feel your frustration here. Pulling out my old silver gel prints made me want to frickin' weep. There's nothing that comes close to that Agfa look and feel. Plastic fibers.. sigh.
I wonder if driving through parts of New Jersey will be any less smelly as a result of all these paper deletions
-D
I wonder if driving through parts of New Jersey will be any less smelly as a result of all these paper deletions
-D
drewbarb
picnic like it's 1999
Thanks for the gloom and doom. Keep buying what's still available, and stock up on anything you find that you like. They'll only make it as long as we buy it.
Brad Bireley
Well-known
How long can you keep paper?
sepiareverb
genius and moron
drewbarb said:
I do buy it, I print at least twice a week, usually three times. I can't afford to stock up on this paper right now, and there is hardly any left to stock up on anyway.
Last edited:
sepiareverb
genius and moron
My frustration stems around the fact that for 150 years we had continuous improvement in materials. Yes, when 35mm took over there was a dip in quality, and a similar dip is what has happened again, only now the 'dipper' is digital. Films improved a lot during the 60's and 70's and 80's. Papers changed, with improvements in VC papers most notable. Chemistry evolved. Then digital hit, and most people were quite happy to accept a huge loss in quality for convienence. And it is this dipper, convienence, is what seems to be killing photography. Few people care that the images they make will not be seen by their grandchildren. Our disposable culture makes 'archival' a useless waste of time. When the range of photographic papers available shrinks our options to make unique images as silver photographers shrinks. Sure, I could shoot digitally, and use a software filter to make it look like I printed Panatomic-X developed in Microdol-X on Portrigia, and view the result in an electronic picture frame. But I am a photographer. I make objects. I don't want to make digital files that look like the objects I used to make. For those who are ambivalent about this loss think what your life would be like if suddenly beer was no longer available.
Or rice, or chicken, or SD cards.
Photographic materials are like food for the work some of us do. I love the materials I grew up on, film and paper and the wet darkroom. The making of objects with these materials are something I would have a hard time doing without. Over the nearly forty years I have been making photographs the bulk of that time has seen the medium improve. I am having a hard time watching the medium change for the worse.
Or rice, or chicken, or SD cards.
Photographic materials are like food for the work some of us do. I love the materials I grew up on, film and paper and the wet darkroom. The making of objects with these materials are something I would have a hard time doing without. Over the nearly forty years I have been making photographs the bulk of that time has seen the medium improve. I am having a hard time watching the medium change for the worse.
Last edited:
David Goldfarb
Well-known
Have you tried any hand coated processes? It's more work, but the results can be stunning, and it gives you kinds of control you might not have thought you could have. If you want the richness of platinum prints, there's no reason you can't make them.
I make albumen prints, but today I saw a print on a handcoated silver chloride emulsion that was just amazing--better than Azo. I caught one day of Ron Mowrey's silver gelatin emulsion workshop here in New York, and while I could see the potential in what he was doing then--emulsions in any grade on any paper that stands up to processing--the print I saw today (Mowrey's coating, an Azo printer's neg) was really convincing.
I make albumen prints, but today I saw a print on a handcoated silver chloride emulsion that was just amazing--better than Azo. I caught one day of Ron Mowrey's silver gelatin emulsion workshop here in New York, and while I could see the potential in what he was doing then--emulsions in any grade on any paper that stands up to processing--the print I saw today (Mowrey's coating, an Azo printer's neg) was really convincing.
Last edited:
sepiareverb
genius and moron
Yes, I've been through most of the alternative processes at one time or another, I shot 1114 and 810 for a long time, and experimented with lots of stuff, from salt prints to tintypes, even did some ambrotypes. I've toyed with becoming a daguerrotypist several times.
The silver print is my medium, and these days the Leica is my camera. Before I moved east I knew a lot of alternative process folks, excellent platinum and albumen printers, a three color carbon printer. The drawback to many of these processes is the need for the larger negative, and when shooting 35mm that entails an intermediate step, using materials that seem even more in danger of vanishing than silver paper. If there aren't enough folks using silver paper to keep it vibrant how many are using 1620 positive films?
I'm venting. Another round of loss for my work today. Digital seems like wondering why all sculptors wouldn't want to embrace CNC machining as the end-all of perfection when some of them just want to keep whittling.
The silver print is my medium, and these days the Leica is my camera. Before I moved east I knew a lot of alternative process folks, excellent platinum and albumen printers, a three color carbon printer. The drawback to many of these processes is the need for the larger negative, and when shooting 35mm that entails an intermediate step, using materials that seem even more in danger of vanishing than silver paper. If there aren't enough folks using silver paper to keep it vibrant how many are using 1620 positive films?
I'm venting. Another round of loss for my work today. Digital seems like wondering why all sculptors wouldn't want to embrace CNC machining as the end-all of perfection when some of them just want to keep whittling.
Last edited:
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
I recently had coffee on a Sunday morning with Ron Mowery. I think what he is doing is really, really important, because the decline in availability of high quality (read: good QC as well as good emulsion) paper does worry me more than film availability. I can afford to stock up on film, though not as much as some can. Paper, because of its expense, is another story.
I do not want to be spending time coating paper, unless it's for Pt/Pd prints, as there is no choice. For silver, I want to be able to buy boxes of paper; I tend to stick to one paper with maybe 2 developer choices, though I'm reevaluating the "one paper" thing. I want to be able to buy my chosen paper in a local store (ha!) or order it online. Spending time learning to coat, dealing with technique, and churning out batches of paper only take away from time photographing and printing.
One of the things Ron told me is that some of the smaller players in the silver paper market are having real trouble because of lack of experience and quality control. When you're trying to do it on a shoestring budget, there are corners that must be cut, things happen that could be avoided with the decades of experience that a Kodak or Ilford bring to their manufacturing.
I showed Ron some of my prints done on Zone VI Brilliant, processed in Amidol. He really liked them, in spite of the fact that my uncontrolled storage and rough treatment has not been kind to some of them. Sadly, Brilliant as made in France is gone; I don't know if the current iteration is as good, but the all-knowing Internet says it's not the same. I dunno.
I agree that the paper situation worries me far more than film. I do think I'll have to learn to hand coat. Thank God for Ron and others like him. He's not a young man, so I hope he'll be able to continue until he gets formulae and techniques perfected enough for the home darkroom worker to be successful.
I do not want to be spending time coating paper, unless it's for Pt/Pd prints, as there is no choice. For silver, I want to be able to buy boxes of paper; I tend to stick to one paper with maybe 2 developer choices, though I'm reevaluating the "one paper" thing. I want to be able to buy my chosen paper in a local store (ha!) or order it online. Spending time learning to coat, dealing with technique, and churning out batches of paper only take away from time photographing and printing.
One of the things Ron told me is that some of the smaller players in the silver paper market are having real trouble because of lack of experience and quality control. When you're trying to do it on a shoestring budget, there are corners that must be cut, things happen that could be avoided with the decades of experience that a Kodak or Ilford bring to their manufacturing.
I showed Ron some of my prints done on Zone VI Brilliant, processed in Amidol. He really liked them, in spite of the fact that my uncontrolled storage and rough treatment has not been kind to some of them. Sadly, Brilliant as made in France is gone; I don't know if the current iteration is as good, but the all-knowing Internet says it's not the same. I dunno.
I agree that the paper situation worries me far more than film. I do think I'll have to learn to hand coat. Thank God for Ron and others like him. He's not a young man, so I hope he'll be able to continue until he gets formulae and techniques perfected enough for the home darkroom worker to be successful.
40oz
...
IDK. There is always market churn. Low spots and high tides. Ask your insurance agent or lawyer about the "paperless office" next time you see them. Digital technology is nice, but it never lives up to promises, and people know this.
FWIW, 35mm film is cut down from large swaths. And as long as that is the case, I can't see companies like Kodak or Ilford dropping a customer base happy to use stock that would otherwise overload the market for smaller formats. Just be liberal in your contact with said companies, and they will recognize their efforts are appreciated.
Paper is obviously tied to film demand. Highs and lows, I think.
FWIW, 35mm film is cut down from large swaths. And as long as that is the case, I can't see companies like Kodak or Ilford dropping a customer base happy to use stock that would otherwise overload the market for smaller formats. Just be liberal in your contact with said companies, and they will recognize their efforts are appreciated.
Paper is obviously tied to film demand. Highs and lows, I think.
dnp
Member
Question: Why isn't it possible to take a digital file and print properly on Silver Gelatin paper? I've noticed that Lightjet has some good output - can't the process be applied to digital as well as film?
Sorry for the basic question - shows my lack of digital prowess
Regards,
D
Sorry for the basic question - shows my lack of digital prowess
Regards,
D
mfunnell
Shaken, so blurred
Quite so, and I can easily understand the frustration of going backwards and having your choices in your chosen medium reduced. There still seem to be improvements being made to film, but quite the opposite seems to be happening with paper - no improvements and options being reduced as products are withdrawn or companies go out of business (or just out of the photographic business).sepiareverb said:
But that's only for the mass market. High quality work is being done in pure digital or via hybrid processes. It may be different from older methods and materials and perhaps not to your taste or preference, but its still being done.sepiareverb said:
But the mass market has always been that way. Think of all the Kodacolor photos that have gone or are going due to the horrid (non)archival properties of that medium (which was the mass market medium). But archival materials are available right now for digital and the whole medium, arguably, will prove more long-lasting over the long haul as manufacturers are graded on the stability of their products (rather than being able to get away with deliberately concealing such things, as Kodak and others did in the past).sepiareverb said:
This is true and most unfortunate. I just don't know what, if anything, can be done about it.sepiareverb said:
I'm in the opposite circumstance. I don't print in the wet darkroom and am not really in a position to be able to, even if I had the inclination. But with advances in digital printing and especially with the advances in the types and varieties of paper available for that medium, I'm very happy with what I'm able to print and the expanding choices available to me. I suspect there will be a continual improvement - and I also strongly suspect this takes time and energy away from traditional materials and redirects the efforts towards what's seen as an expanding market segment. So, I suspect that in part I'm benefiting from your loss. Its not deliberate, I can assure you. I wish that at the very least things would stay the same for traditional materials, rather than going backwards. But my wishes, and yours, appear to make little difference in the face of large market movements.
I certainly understand that, and can only say again that I wish it were otherwise.sepiareverb said:
...Mike
jmcd
Well-known
"Why isn't it possible to take a digital file and print properly on Silver Gelatin paper?"
De Vere makes an enlargers for doing just this—one for printing on fiber base for color and b&w, one for rc for color and b&w.
Yes, the paper is vital. As for VC, I always find it much easier to get a print I like, richer, sharper, on graded. Luckily, graded is still being produced—those by Ilford, Kentmere, Oriental, and Slavich are wonderful. I hope to keep using them.
It's a few years old, but Fuji Acros seems to be one type of film improvement. And so many of the other films don't really need improving—they are quite good already.
I vote to support those who are making excellent materials now—theirs is a noble effort.
De Vere makes an enlargers for doing just this—one for printing on fiber base for color and b&w, one for rc for color and b&w.
Yes, the paper is vital. As for VC, I always find it much easier to get a print I like, richer, sharper, on graded. Luckily, graded is still being produced—those by Ilford, Kentmere, Oriental, and Slavich are wonderful. I hope to keep using them.
It's a few years old, but Fuji Acros seems to be one type of film improvement. And so many of the other films don't really need improving—they are quite good already.
I vote to support those who are making excellent materials now—theirs is a noble effort.
sepiareverb
genius and moron
Started looking at Ron Mowrey's stuff, I'll spend some real time with that this weekend. Never would have imagined Gelatin Silver might become an alternative process in my lifetime.
Yes, high end digital prints can be things of beauty. There is a guy near me who does stunning large scale digital prints. Such quality comes with a stunning price tag per page for materials, not to mention equipment. Yes, it will come down in price. But sitting at a computer and manipulating digital files is a different art than I want to do. Standing around the printer listening to the zip and spit just doesn't have the same appeal to me as burning & dodging with these two hands, nor does the finished product have the same appeal.
Kodacolor is a good analogy to the past ten years, but I'm betting a jpeg will last less well than a 1970 c-print has. Certainly less well than a poorly processed Velox from the 20's.
I'd be curious to hear of other similar vanishings, and what users did or are doing. TV is next here in the US, as that goes digital next year, then I suppose it will be radio.
Yes, high end digital prints can be things of beauty. There is a guy near me who does stunning large scale digital prints. Such quality comes with a stunning price tag per page for materials, not to mention equipment. Yes, it will come down in price. But sitting at a computer and manipulating digital files is a different art than I want to do. Standing around the printer listening to the zip and spit just doesn't have the same appeal to me as burning & dodging with these two hands, nor does the finished product have the same appeal.
Kodacolor is a good analogy to the past ten years, but I'm betting a jpeg will last less well than a 1970 c-print has. Certainly less well than a poorly processed Velox from the 20's.
I'd be curious to hear of other similar vanishings, and what users did or are doing. TV is next here in the US, as that goes digital next year, then I suppose it will be radio.
Jerevan
Recycled User
sepiareverb said:
Last thing I heard was that Foma has found a paper base supplier in the far east and will continue to produce the 532/542. Foma used to use the same paper base as Kentmere (for their Art papers) but Foma papers have been slower in sales, by the way.
But I guess Ron Mowrey's workshops are a great start onto something. Another thing to look at is www.thelightfarm.com.
Good luck with the hands-on!
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
One of the things Mowery told me was that some smaller paper manufacturers are having problems with paper specifications. Don't remember all the details, but basically we need to be prepared for "problems"; QC (which isn't necessarily cheap) and decades of experience do count.
David Goldfarb
Well-known
It's not just the small manufacturers. There are only a couple of sources for baryta paper base, and Ron's told me that he's seen problems with the base that he's ordered that have also shown up in Ilford papers. One hopes that if the baryta inkjet papers succeed, they'll keep demand up for the paper base, which is also used for gelatin silver papers.
sakebalboa
Member
how long can you keep non rc paper?
Ade-oh
Well-known
It's a fact that film related products are going to decline but I doubt they'll go completely: we'll just have to be more creative with what remains to achieve the effects we took for granted in the past.
As for the longevity of paper, I found a couple of boxes of Ilford Multigrade III FB in my garage (where my darkroom is) the other day and printed a few sheets: they seem fine so far, having been stored in a dark filing cabinet in a cool, dark room for the best part of fourteen years.
As for the longevity of paper, I found a couple of boxes of Ilford Multigrade III FB in my garage (where my darkroom is) the other day and printed a few sheets: they seem fine so far, having been stored in a dark filing cabinet in a cool, dark room for the best part of fourteen years.
Toby
On the alert
To be honest I don't really miss using traditional papers. I think that in terms of quality, inkjets are right up there with silver prints now, especially if you are taking about consistancy of quality from print to print. I can't tell you what a relief it is to finish working on scan or digital file and know that I can print as many as I want and they'll be the same and I won't have to spot each one. I can understand how silver prints may have more perceived value from a fine art point of view, each being more unique, but they are not really better in quality, and the way inkjet technology is moving, soon they may be notably worse.