Ilford films: base side (question for Simon G.)

Discussion in 'B&W: Film, Paper, Chemistry' started by michael_r, Jun 25, 2014.

  1. michael_r

    michael_r Subscriber

    Messages:
    6,438
    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2010
    Location:
    Montreal, Canada
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I came across a recent article by Howard Bond about the current lineup/availability of Ilford and Kodak films (as of December 2013), in which he says something interesting I had not read before:

    “Ilford’s FP4 Plus and HP5 Plus (I didn’t examine Delta 100) have a welcome feature: the non-emulsion side has a minute texture similar to that found on anti-Newton-ring glass. That prevents Newton rings when a negative contacts the upper glass of a negative carrier...”

    1. Is this correct?
    2. Is it on Delta 100 also?
    3. Is it on all formats?
    4. Is this a recent thing or has it been there as long as the latest generations of these films have been around (eg has Ilford FP4 Plus always had this feature)?

    For reference, the base side of Kodak's TXP sheet film has a slight "tooth" for retouching purposes, so it makes a handy anti-newton ring spacer.

    Thanks
     
  2. Mustafa Umut Sarac

    Mustafa Umut Sarac Member

    Messages:
    4,571
    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2006
    Location:
    İstanbul
    Shooter:
    35mm RF
    I searched your question and learned XP2 and APX 25 have smooth emulsion and even with an anti newton glass , rings happens.

    ps. I read below for Delta 100.

    Chris Waller Hero, May 11, 2004; 04:59 a.m.
    I have an AN upper neg glass and a plain lower one. Thus the AN glass presses against smooth film base, so no problem. But the low glass presses against the emulsion. Now, in the case of TMX the emulsion can be so smooth that Newton's Rings appear. I never get rings with Ilford Delta because that has a matt surfaced emulsion. I compared two sets of Delta 100 negs by reflecting light off them at a shallow angle from a light fitting which has 3 lamps in it. From the negs developed in D23 (solvent, fine grain) a could see three clear reflections. But, from the neg developed in Rodinal, I just got a diffuse reflection - it was not possible to distinguish the three lamps. Comparing the TMX negs in the same way, the difference was much smaller. Both seemed quite shiny, but those devved in Rodinal were just perceptibly less glossy than those devved in D23.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 25, 2014
  3. Photo Engineer

    Photo Engineer Subscriber

    Messages:
    25,586
    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2005
    Location:
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    The "tooth' on Kodak film interfered with scanning in some cases, and so the "tooth" was adjusted to prevent scanning problems.

    PE
     
  4. pentaxuser

    pentaxuser Subscriber

    Messages:
    8,104
    Joined:
    May 9, 2005
    Location:
    Daventry, No
    Shooter:
    35mm
    It's a good question, Michael and already it looks as if an answer from Simon Galley would ideally cover all Ilford films and all formats.

    While AN glass for any particular enlarger might prevent any problems, it is (a) not always easy to find and (b) can be quite expensive to buy on the likes of e-bay.


    I look forward to Simon's answer

    pentaxuser
     
  5. michael_r

    michael_r Subscriber

    Messages:
    6,438
    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2010
    Location:
    Montreal, Canada
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    PE, yes, which is apparently why the TMax films and Acros have shiny emulsion surfaces. It's an intermittent pain in the ass for us analog printers because while it is fairly straight forward to solve newton ring problems on the base side, not as simple on the emulsion side. So, yippee for scanning.

    The Ilford films don't have this issue on the emulsion side. The emulsion surface has the good old matte finish.

    I assume the sheen is a property of the overcoat rather than the emulsion itself.
     
  6. Photo Engineer

    Photo Engineer Subscriber

    Messages:
    25,586
    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2005
    Location:
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Plain gelatin is semi gloss. Added methyl methacrylate beads in the overcoat tone it down to the level desired, but if you use too much it looks grainy (when it is not).

    PE
     
  7. michael_r

    michael_r Subscriber

    Messages:
    6,438
    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2010
    Location:
    Montreal, Canada
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Thanks. Interesting info.
     
  8. Dr Croubie

    Dr Croubie Member

    Messages:
    2,013
    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2013
    Location:
    rAdelaide
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Maybe that's why Ektar is advertised as good for scanning?
    Because after spending $150 on an ANR-top/glass-bottom universal carrier for my LPL6700, the damn stuff still gives me newton-rings.
    It wet-scans nicely on my better-scanning holder, with Lumina fluid and Aztek mylar, if only the colours looked as nice on-screen (and frankly, if I'm going to have to scan it anyway, I've got enough Velvia to last the next decade).
     
  9. cmacd123

    cmacd123 Subscriber

    Messages:
    1,447
    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Location:
    Stittsville, Ontario
    Shooter:
    35mm
    is that what makes ORWO Un54 look like it has funny grain?
     
  10. Simon R Galley

    Simon R Galley Subscriber

    Messages:
    2,052
    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2005
    Location:
    Cheshire UK
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Dear Michael R,

    I would love to say that we have discovered a way in which our film products were less prone to AN rings than others...........sadly I cannot, all films are likely to suffer including all HARMAN manufactured films.

    According to our technical service the supercoat* on the 'top' surface' ie non-emulsion side has in its package a 'element' designed to reduce the effect of AN rings, but they could not quantify the reduction as a percentage.

    * A supercoat is present on all ILFORD Films but the 'package' varies from product to product and format to format.

    Again, according to our technical service, various things can conspire to lessen or heighten the occurance of AN rings such as temperature and humidity, they recommend the use of ultra high quality AN glass as the most effective countermeasure.

    Simon ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology Limited :
     
  11. michael_r

    michael_r Subscriber

    Messages:
    6,438
    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2010
    Location:
    Montreal, Canada
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Thanks for the feedback, Simon.

    I use various countermeasures when the dreaded rings occasionally appear (everything from high quality anti-newton ring glass and/or coated glasses to TXP spacers). Sometimes simply wiping down the glass with alcohol works. It's an intermittent problem.

    Thanks again. I was just curious about the statement in the article.
     
  12. Photo Engineer

    Photo Engineer Subscriber

    Messages:
    25,586
    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2005
    Location:
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I have no idea.
     
  13. pentaxuser

    pentaxuser Subscriber

    Messages:
    8,104
    Joined:
    May 9, 2005
    Location:
    Daventry, No
    Shooter:
    35mm
    Based On Simon's reply I wonder where Howard Bond got his information or has he simply seen something on the surface of Ilford films that he believes will prevent Newton's Rings?

    Did he qualify his statement in any way with potential elements of doubt as it sounds quite unequivocal to me as quoted.

    To state a personal conclusion based on what you see and how you think that will decrease the incidence of Newton's Rings is one thing but stated as it apparently was seems to give his conclusion more foundation that it appears to deserve, based on Ilford's stated position .

    pentaxuser
     
  14. michael_r

    michael_r Subscriber

    Messages:
    6,438
    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2010
    Location:
    Montreal, Canada
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    In the article he doesn't say any more on the subject. I was going to contact him about it.
     
  15. Paul Cunningham

    Paul Cunningham Subscriber

    Messages:
    230
    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2011
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I'm curious if you could elaborate on the qualities or brands of 'ultra high quality' versus high or ordinary quality AN glass. Aside from trial and error, can you point us in the right direction?
    Thanks, Paul
     
  16. DREW WILEY

    DREW WILEY Member

    Messages:
    4,582
    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2011
    Shooter:
    8x10 Format
    The improved scanning "tooth" on Kodak color films (esp sheet films) does in fact do an excellent job suppressing Newton rings, but not completely if you happen to live in a foggy climate like I do. Films like HP5, FP4, and TMY400 also are good in this respect. But there are a number of downright slick films out there, in which case I find it necessary to use antinewton glass on BOTH sides of the neg. The trick is to
    have a very precisely adjusted enlarging setup, and use only as small an f-stop on the enlarging lens as necessary, to keep the depth of field
    limited to the emulsion itself. Once you get beyond this basic comment, things get more complicated and require practical testing.
     
  17. DREW WILEY

    DREW WILEY Member

    Messages:
    4,582
    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2011
    Shooter:
    8x10 Format
    Paul - you won't find much in antinewton glass these days except from Focal Point. It's decent stuff, but maybe not equal to true Durst or Omega glass, if you can still find it, which have more of a wave rather than stippled pattern. Which kind of glass is best depends on the film,
    the focal-length/angle and MTF of the enlarging lenses, f/stop and degree of magnification, the diffusion of the light source, etc,etc. I once had samples on hand of well over a dozen brands of antinewton glass from all over the world. Now all but one are out of production. Sometimes optically coated picture glass will do, but not in my climate.