Tammo
Tell me, how long does it take for the emulsion on ADOX paper (neutral and warm) to stabilise? Both my sheets are as soft as butter; they were probably sent whilst still warm. The ADOX paper I’ve had in the fridge for a few months has more or less normal gradient, so it’s down to the paper. Is it advisable to store the paper at room temperature to let it mature, or is it better to keep it in the fridge? I mean, I leave my bananas out to ripen too :angry:
cfb_de
Hi Tammo,
Our roll stock actually turned out to be quite suitable: 00-4 – I’m happy with that. Could it be that, based on existing filter values, you assumed a different batch would behave in exactly the same way?
As for the paper, I’d suggest storing it in the living room for two or three weeks and checking after two weeks to see what’s happened. Overall, the process can take a few weeks, but the first two weeks shouldn’t be a problem even at room temperature. After that, pop it in the cellar or fridge. Mind you, the fridge is usually too dry, and you might end up complaining about the paper not lying flat afterwards.
Best regards,
Franz
MirkoBoeddecker
Both my papers are as soft as butter
Could you perhaps elaborate on that a bit?
No one has actually described them as ‘buttery soft’ yet.
What you suspect is indeed true. We’re very quick, and we rarely produce anything substandard here :-)
Better just in time than left to hang for years and turn a lovely grey.
But of course, this shouldn’t cause any application issues.
That’s why I’m interested in this now.
Regards,
Mirko
Wolf_XL
Hello,
I also used the first sheet of paper from the roll promotion last week – it worked perfectly. As for the filter values, there shouldn’t be any issues either – I have the VC module on my Dunco, and it worked perfectly there. Compared to my other papers from various manufacturers, it’s perhaps half a stop softer – i.e. where I’d normally use Grade 2, I need 2.5 or 3 with the ADOX. I developed it in Eukobrom. And whether I achieve grade 5 or just grade 4 with this paper is of little personal concern to me – because if I need grade 5, I’ve done something wrong with the negative...
Tammo
Even when calibrating the light meter, the test negative was very soft, which isn’t usually the case with ‘standard paper’. Compared to my older warm-toned baryta paper, the neutral-toned baryta was about two stops softer.
Wolf_XL
Hi Tanno,
Just a silly question – how old is/was the developer? Because if it’s gone off, you’ll only get washed-out prints... It’s happened to me before; you wonder why the prints aren’t ‘crisp’ anymore and start looking everywhere else, until it suddenly dawns on you that you’ve been using the developer for six months...
Tammo
The developer was brand new; I’d only just opened the bottle.
RomanJRohleder
Mirko,
>Could you perhaps elaborate on that a bit?
>No one has said it’s ‘buttery soft’ yet.
You’re not reading your own forum closely enough. ;-)
See my post at
http://www.fotoimpex.de/forum/index.php?showtopic=888&st=10
Back then, I wrote about the Vario Classic FB roll film, which was just under six weeks old at the time:
"I quickly checked a few grey wedges yesterday; preliminary results:
Filtering/Visible steps/ISO-R
15M/8/120
100M/6/90
130M/5/75
100Y/14/210
130Y/16/240"
So butter-butter-butter-soft. Or ‘000’ for all I care.
Maybe I’ll update this over the weekend.
Cheers,
Roman
Wolfgg
Roman: Converting directly from "visible steps" to ISO-R (steps × 0.15 × 100) results in an ISO-R value that is too high, because ISO-R only ranges from a density of 0.04 through fog up to 90% of the maximum density; your eye can perceive more steps.
RomanJRohleder
Wolfgang,
aaaaaah, that explains why I was a bit off the mark when 'playing with the Densi' this afternoon.
Roman
Wolfgg
I’m sure I’m already known as a bit of a zone system fanatic on this forum. I don’t just ‘apply’ the zone system to the subject; I also measure the paper thoroughly at least once. So: Agfa grey scale (0.15D = 1/2 stop per step) into the film holder, paper underneath, and expose. Then determine at what light level “you can see something” and at what light level “it stops getting any darker”. Then count the steps in between; as with you, this always yields significantly more than those instruction leaflets or other data sheets tend to spout out in terms of ISO-R, because well… see above. But only my measurement is usable in a laboratory context (and in terms of quality); ISO-R is only good for comparisons.
By the way: if you’re using the Agfa grey scale, this one (at least mine) isn’t particularly accurate. At the bottom (target=0, actual=0) and at the top (target=2.7, actual=2.8) it’s quite good, but unfortunately there’s a dip in the middle with a maximum (target=1.5, actual=1.82!). Either it can’t be made any more accurate for the price, or it’s too old (>20 years). I only use it now to quickly get a feel for the two ends of an unknown paper.
Wolfgang
RomanJRohleder
Wolfgang,
No questions asked – that’s how I’ve been doing it since the start of last year – using one of three stored Stouffer T2115s. I have another theory: perhaps the Callier effect is already coming into play when projecting from a screen onto paper.
Roman
Wolfgg
Roman: I had the Callier effect briefly in mind earlier too. For it to have a visible effect, however, you need to go for full diffusion in black and white, i.e. a diffuser screen directly behind the film, as is usually the case with colour negative film. In my setup, there’s the output of the colour mixing head (slightly smaller in diameter than an opal bulb), then the double condenser above the film, so it’s somewhere between directional and diffuse. Callier was never an issue here.
