From: ____ on
In article <13oljep59cmg16b(a)news.supernews.com>, <jjs> wrote:

> I'm on the edge of beating myself up. I got a very clean Ilford 400
> enlarging head. It mounted properly to my enlarger. Tomorrow I will get some
> more paper with the intent of using it.
>
> But the filters are Yellow and Magenta.
>
> Are these not the filters used for Ilford MC? I ask because a friend
> suggested they are not.
>
> Let me have it. I deserve it.
>
> jj

Ilford uses a slightly different scheme of filtration for their papers
than say Kodak does.

They do use yellow and magenta filtration, however I seem to recall its
about 1 filter grade difference from Kodak values. That is the Ilford
filtration when dialed in versus using the gels requires about 1 filter
grade more filtration. Some of their middle 2-3 values in the gels do
look somewhat odd being salmon colored "orange".

Ilford also measures beginning at 00.....for the gels.

Based on no real hard tests I concluded many years ago that Ilford
papers are softer- and nicer for my work than Kodak papers, Kodak papers
tended to my eye to have a lot more inherent contrast.....just my
perception. The one note I would add is that in doing my printing Dekol
was at that point my primary developer regardless of the paper.

--
Reality is a picture perfected and never looking back.
From: Geoffrey S. Mendelson on
internetphobic(a)deletedmail.com wrote:
> They do use yellow and magenta filtration, however I seem to recall its
> about 1 filter grade difference from Kodak values. That is the Ilford
> filtration when dialed in versus using the gels requires about 1 filter
> grade more filtration. Some of their middle 2-3 values in the gels do
> look somewhat odd being salmon colored "orange".

That may be because European filter grades are about 1 lower than the
equivalent U.S. papers.

In the 1960's (in Philly) when I was buying whatever I could get my
hands on cheaply, I quickly found out that Agfa Brovira 3 was what I
wanted, and Kodak Kodabromide 2 was a more expensive second choice.

Some local stores carried Luminous paper, no one carried Ilford
until Multigrade came out in the 1970s.

Geoff.

--
Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem, Israel gsm(a)mendelson.com N3OWJ/4X1GM
IL Voice: (07)-7424-1667 U.S. Voice: 1-215-821-1838
Visit my 'blog at http://geoffstechno.livejournal.com/
From: Richard Knoppow on

"Geoffrey S. Mendelson" <gsm(a)mendelson.com> wrote in message
news:slrnfoojrg.vkr.gsm(a)cable.mendelson.com...
> internetphobic(a)deletedmail.com wrote:
>> They do use yellow and magenta filtration, however I seem
>> to recall its
>> about 1 filter grade difference from Kodak values. That
>> is the Ilford
>> filtration when dialed in versus using the gels requires
>> about 1 filter
>> grade more filtration. Some of their middle 2-3 values in
>> the gels do
>> look somewhat odd being salmon colored "orange".
>
> That may be because European filter grades are about 1
> lower than the
> equivalent U.S. papers.
>
> In the 1960's (in Philly) when I was buying whatever I
> could get my
> hands on cheaply, I quickly found out that Agfa Brovira 3
> was what I
> wanted, and Kodak Kodabromide 2 was a more expensive
> second choice.
>
> Some local stores carried Luminous paper, no one carried
> Ilford
> until Multigrade came out in the 1970s.
>
> Geoff.
>
> --
> Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem, Israel gsm(a)mendelson.com
> N3OWJ/4X1GM
> IL Voice: (07)-7424-1667 U.S. Voice: 1-215-821-1838
> Visit my 'blog at http://geoffstechno.livejournal.com/

AFAIK paper grades are established by an ISO standard
that is world wide. Quite some years ago Agfa used a system
of labeling paper grades which was about one paper grade
softer per number than the system used in the US or England.
Hense Agfa Grade-3 was about equal to Kodak Grade-2. I am
not sure what year Agfa adopted the standard system but it
must have been about 20 years ago.
Now, paper grades are approximate. The maximum density
is dependant on the paper surface and texture so that a
matte surface will have lower contrast for the same emulsion
contrast than glossy paper. This is indicated in some
manufacturer's date, particularly in some Kodak data sheets.
Some of these may still be available on the Kodak web site.
Another variation is in the relative exposures needed
for various grades on variable contrast paper. These vary a
bit among various brands. One clue is to look at the color
head settings recommended for a given grade and different
papers.


--
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk(a)ix.netcom.com


From: ____ on
In article <13opmb6kcp1rsdf(a)corp.supernews.com>,
"Richard Knoppow" <dickburk(a)ix.netcom.com> wrote:

> "Geoffrey S. Mendelson" <gsm(a)mendelson.com> wrote in message
> news:slrnfoojrg.vkr.gsm(a)cable.mendelson.com...
> > internetphobic(a)deletedmail.com wrote:
> >> They do use yellow and magenta filtration, however I seem
> >> to recall its
> >> about 1 filter grade difference from Kodak values. That
> >> is the Ilford
> >> filtration when dialed in versus using the gels requires
> >> about 1 filter
> >> grade more filtration. Some of their middle 2-3 values in
> >> the gels do
> >> look somewhat odd being salmon colored "orange".
> >
> > That may be because European filter grades are about 1
> > lower than the
> > equivalent U.S. papers.
> >
> > In the 1960's (in Philly) when I was buying whatever I
> > could get my
> > hands on cheaply, I quickly found out that Agfa Brovira 3
> > was what I
> > wanted, and Kodak Kodabromide 2 was a more expensive
> > second choice.
> >
> > Some local stores carried Luminous paper, no one carried
> > Ilford
> > until Multigrade came out in the 1970s.
> >
> > Geoff.
> >
> > --
> > Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem, Israel gsm(a)mendelson.com
> > N3OWJ/4X1GM
> > IL Voice: (07)-7424-1667 U.S. Voice: 1-215-821-1838
> > Visit my 'blog at http://geoffstechno.livejournal.com/
>
> AFAIK paper grades are established by an ISO standard
> that is world wide. Quite some years ago Agfa used a system
> of labeling paper grades which was about one paper grade
> softer per number than the system used in the US or England.
> Hense Agfa Grade-3 was about equal to Kodak Grade-2. I am
> not sure what year Agfa adopted the standard system but it
> must have been about 20 years ago.
> Now, paper grades are approximate. The maximum density
> is dependant on the paper surface and texture so that a
> matte surface will have lower contrast for the same emulsion
> contrast than glossy paper. This is indicated in some
> manufacturer's date, particularly in some Kodak data sheets.
> Some of these may still be available on the Kodak web site.
> Another variation is in the relative exposures needed
> for various grades on variable contrast paper. These vary a
> bit among various brands. One clue is to look at the color
> head settings recommended for a given grade and different
> papers.

In my experience:

Many times the matte surface paper will have a dmax of 1.50-1.55 and
quite a long ascent to get to it for a "NF" <no filter exposure>. The
matte papers tend to have about three/three and one half usable grades.

Whereas glossy papers tend to have a dmax around 2.00 to 2.10 for a
"NF" exposure.....using a 21 step wedge. Seem to have 4.5 grades maybe
five if its a good paper.

--
Reality is a picture perfected and never looking back.
From: Richard Knoppow on

"____" <internetphobic(a)deletedmail.com> wrote in message
news:internetphobic-3F34E0.18471815012008(a)newsgroups.comcast.net...
> In article <13opmb6kcp1rsdf(a)corp.supernews.com>,
> "Richard Knoppow" <dickburk(a)ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
>> "Geoffrey S. Mendelson" <gsm(a)mendelson.com> wrote in
>> message
>> news:slrnfoojrg.vkr.gsm(a)cable.mendelson.com...
>> > internetphobic(a)deletedmail.com wrote:
>> >> They do use yellow and magenta filtration, however I
>> >> seem
>> >> to recall its
>> >> about 1 filter grade difference from Kodak values.
>> >> That
>> >> is the Ilford
>> >> filtration when dialed in versus using the gels
>> >> requires
>> >> about 1 filter
>> >> grade more filtration. Some of their middle 2-3 values
>> >> in
>> >> the gels do
>> >> look somewhat odd being salmon colored "orange".
>> >
>> > That may be because European filter grades are about 1
>> > lower than the
>> > equivalent U.S. papers.
>> >
>> > In the 1960's (in Philly) when I was buying whatever I
>> > could get my
>> > hands on cheaply, I quickly found out that Agfa Brovira
>> > 3
>> > was what I
>> > wanted, and Kodak Kodabromide 2 was a more expensive
>> > second choice.
>> >
>> > Some local stores carried Luminous paper, no one
>> > carried
>> > Ilford
>> > until Multigrade came out in the 1970s.
>> >
>> > Geoff.
>> >
>> > --
>> > Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem, Israel
>> > gsm(a)mendelson.com
>> > N3OWJ/4X1GM
>> > IL Voice: (07)-7424-1667 U.S. Voice: 1-215-821-1838
>> > Visit my 'blog at http://geoffstechno.livejournal.com/
>>
>> AFAIK paper grades are established by an ISO
>> standard
>> that is world wide. Quite some years ago Agfa used a
>> system
>> of labeling paper grades which was about one paper grade
>> softer per number than the system used in the US or
>> England.
>> Hense Agfa Grade-3 was about equal to Kodak Grade-2. I am
>> not sure what year Agfa adopted the standard system but
>> it
>> must have been about 20 years ago.
>> Now, paper grades are approximate. The maximum
>> density
>> is dependant on the paper surface and texture so that a
>> matte surface will have lower contrast for the same
>> emulsion
>> contrast than glossy paper. This is indicated in some
>> manufacturer's date, particularly in some Kodak data
>> sheets.
>> Some of these may still be available on the Kodak web
>> site.
>> Another variation is in the relative exposures
>> needed
>> for various grades on variable contrast paper. These vary
>> a
>> bit among various brands. One clue is to look at the
>> color
>> head settings recommended for a given grade and different
>> papers.
>
> In my experience:
>
> Many times the matte surface paper will have a dmax of
> 1.50-1.55 and
> quite a long ascent to get to it for a "NF" <no filter
> exposure>. The
> matte papers tend to have about three/three and one half
> usable grades.
>
> Whereas glossy papers tend to have a dmax around 2.00 to
> 2.10 for a
> "NF" exposure.....using a 21 step wedge. Seem to have 4.5
> grades maybe
> five if its a good paper.
>
> --
I agree. This is also obvious from some Kodak data on
their older papers. The visual contrast is affected by the
density or perhaps its better to call it the reflective
range of the paper. Glossy RC and ferrotyped glossy fiber
have the longet range of all at both ends. Very few papers
are capable of Dmax greater than about 2.0. This is better
than the Dmax of some of the classic papers of the past (Azo
for instance) which even in ferrotyped glossy had Dmax of no
more than perhaps 1.8. Textured or matt surfaces reduce this
a lot due to light scatter throughout the scale.
I have a couple of very old Agfa/Ansco paper sample
books. Agfa and Ansco had some very distinctive surfaces
which I think would be completely unacceptable today. Kodak
also had some extreme surfaces but not quite as destructive
to the image. For the most part these highly textured papers
were intended to reduce the amount of retouching needed on
portraits by simply supressing fine detail. I've seen
portraits from the 1930s where so much soft focus, texture,
retouching, has been done as to make the image nearly
generic, i.e., you can't recognize the person.


--
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk(a)ix.netcom.com


First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5
Prev: Enlarger question
Next: What kind of dry-mount press?