I've been printing for a couple months on Ilford MG IV RC. I like the prints and the washing times, but I am interested in toning, and am wondering if FB paper is worth the trouble? If it is, I would like to do exposure/contrast strips, and test prints on RC and transfer this to FB. Are Ilford's RC and FB papers close enough to do this, or do I need to retest on FB paper for the prints I want toned? I've ordered chemicals to make toners and will test in the near future, but would appreciate any opinions. Thanks Ryan

-- ryan olson (ryno@bitstream.net), July 18, 1999

Answers

You should really test the paper you are using. Emulsion batches vary, and it is not likely that a box of RC and FB are going to be from the same batch. Also, FB papers usually have longer development times, and the paper speeds may vary.

-- Peter Korsborn (korsborn@gte.net), July 19, 1999.

Ryan, FB is worth the trouble if you have the time to spend doing it, however toning rc prints is nice too.. i would however suggest toning on Kodak RC's, as the ilford ones can be very difficult to work with when toning. I prefer the Ilford Multigrade papers to the kodak in most instances, tho this is an exception. Sean

-- Sean (ZBeeblebrox42@yahoo.com), July 19, 1999.

Fiber based papers is definitely worth the time and effort, for archival purposes. If you want to use an RC paper however that tones well try Luminos (Kentmere in UK). Their RC Art is a nice, mildly textured paper that readily accepts toners. Nice stuff. Their Flexicon RC tones well also. I use the pearl surface which has a nice sheen to it. I get it from B&H and the price is comparable to the Ilford papers. The RC Art is a bit pricy for RC but I think its worth it as there aren't too many RC papers out there with a textured, fiber-like surface.

-- Walter Massa (Massacam@aol.com), July 19, 1999.

Ryan;

I've tried switching back and forth between FB and RC Ilford MG VI. The two biggest reasons that I persisted in using RC paper was the washing time for conventional processing of FB and the ability of RC papers to lie flat.

I belong to a group of B&W photographers and our main activity is to critique each others work. I was constantly being dinged by the very advanced workers about using RC paper. I realized that my RC prints(ilford RC VI Pearl Finish) were not as good as the ones printed on FB glossy and drymounted.

So I adopted the Ilford Archival Processing method for FB and have been able to cut process and washing time by about 1/2, getting fairly close to RC processing times. As to the wrinkles, I picked up a used dry mount press and use it to flatten FB prints to nearly the flatness of RC paper, in addition to dry mounting my best work. I also have started selenimum toning my FB prints and they no longer have the slight greenish-brown color typical of Ilford papers.

Another change I've made is using Ethol LPD developer full strength. This gives me better blacks than Dektol or Ilford MG developer. In my case it also eliminated skin irritation on my hands.

I've found that for consistency, all test strips and work prints need to be out of the same box of paper as the final print. I chop up a lot of 11x14 and 16x20 paper for this!

-- Gene Crumpler (nikonguy@worldnet.att.net), July 28, 1999.