Lodima Fine Art Paper ready to take orders

Discussion in 'Contact Printing' started by Michael A. Smith, Mar 17, 2009.

  1. Michael A. Smith

    Michael A. Smith Subscriber

    Messages:
    660
    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2002
    March 2009 update
    LODIMA FINE ART™ Silver Chloride Contact Printing Paper

    The results are in. Lodima Fine Art paper is a success. We are now ready to take orders for the big production run of Lodima Fine Art™ paper.

    http://www.michaelandpaula.com

    At the moment we are having problems with the shopping cart accepting overseas orders, but we are working on that and expect to have it fixed soon.

    Michael A. Smith
     
  2. chrisf

    chrisf Member

    Messages:
    77
    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2004
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    This is great news. I'm down to my last 5 sheets of the first run.

    chris
     
  3. Sanjay Sen

    Sanjay Sen Member

    Messages:
    1,249
    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2005
    Location:
    New York, NY
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Hi,

    Is there a deadline or cut-off date for orders to be placed for this production run? I missed the last one and would like to get in on this one, but I just spent a bunch of money replenishing my paper stock.


    Regards,
    Sanjay
     
  4. John D. Romano

    John D. Romano Member

    Messages:
    11
    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2009
    Shooter:
    35mm RF
    I received the e-mail today as well and I am preparing to place my order for a box each of the 8 X 10. Anyone have any real-world experienced advice on this paper regarding a good starting point on exposure and developer choice ? Things like wattage of bulb, type of reflector, exposure time, distance to printing frame, type of developer to bring out the best tonal range ? My standard developer for enlargements is Dektol. Will this work okay with this paper ?

    Thanks
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 18, 2009
  5. jgjbowen

    jgjbowen Member

    Messages:
    879
    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2003
    Location:
    Richmond, VA
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    John,

    You will find the answer to most of your questions on the Azo Forum. There is a section devoted to Lodima. You will find that most Azo/Lodimia workers use Michael Smith's Amidol, but some folks use and like Ansco 130, Neutol WA and a few other developers. Dektol is not considered ideal for Azo. I have NOT tried Lodima with Dektol, but I found Azo/Dektol to have too green of a print color for my tastes. One of the advantages of Silver Chloride emulsions is the abiliity to shift the print color through developer use or various developer additives. With Michael's Amidol formula, increasing the Kbr will warm the print color.

    If you decide to try Amidol make sure you get some of the NON-Chinese amidol. If you order through Artcraft or the Photographer's Formulary, be sure to specify that you do NOT want Chinese Amodol. While the Chinese Amidol will work, it stains the prints yellow and it takes about 10 minutes in the wash to get rid of it. 10 minutes in the wash isn't so bad if you are just doing proof prints, but 10 minutes to "get the yellow out" is a long time if you are trying to evaluate the nuances of a fine print.

    John
     
  6. Mahler_one

    Mahler_one Member

    Messages:
    1,153
    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2002
    Mentioning other developers, has anyone used any of the Moersch paper developers with Silver Chloride papers-especially the "eco" which has a very long shelf life?

    Ed
     
  7. JJV

    JJV Member

    Messages:
    6
    Joined:
    May 10, 2005
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    This is just to signal that I am currently using Moersch Sepia with the Lodima Paper with very good results. I used to develop Azo using catechol/sepia two baths but I have now switched to Sepia for ease of use and nice contrast. I have used once Meritol with Lodima, which produced a warmer tone but needed a much longer developping time (1+14 dilution in both cases).
    I am not taking much care about the exhaustion of the concentrate in the opened bottle but never noticed anything detrimental with the Sepia developer.
    Moersch also now has an amidol liquid formula which I may try...but the result have to be dramatically better for me to use a more expensive and "dirty" developer to work with!

    Cheers,

    JJ
     
  8. michael9793

    michael9793 Member

    Messages:
    2,012
    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2003
    Location:
    Fort Myers,
    Shooter:
    ULarge Format
    Just a quick word,
    we are at Michael and Paula's workshop and he has printed both new and old paper. the only difference we see at all is the speed and that is faster. He printed some of our negatives and did everything from flash to water bath with it and it is just a time difference. We have a beautiful chloride paper again to print our contact prints. If you think you can get as good a print enlarging, you can't and this new paper will show that.

    michael andersen
     
  9. EASmithV

    EASmithV Member

    Messages:
    1,926
    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2008
    Location:
    Maryland
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Wait, so it's worse for making enlargements than Azo?
     
  10. Thomas Bertilsson

    Thomas Bertilsson Subscriber

    Messages:
    15,254
    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2003
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I'm sorry Mike, but I'm yawning a bit here.

    For us regular hacks that can't afford large format (big enough for contact printing anyway) we're just gonna have to do with the inferior products there are for enlarging.

    With all due respect to Michael and Paula for bringing Lodima to fruition, (and considerable respect should be paid to them for that), but that's just a childish sandbox comment that is completely unnecessary. There are many products that are good enough.

     
  11. c6h6o3

    c6h6o3 Member

    Messages:
    3,219
    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2002
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    There are a lot of problems with Lodima paper. It will take time and work for M&P to get it right. Let's help them make it perfect.

    As to the relative qualities of enlargement vs. contact printing, I'd urge you to look at the photographs of Brett Weston, who did both. My favorite print of his is an enlargement, and I only know that because I was told. I defy you to tell the difference by looking only at his prints. Granted, he had much better enlarging papers to work with, but I've seen some simply magnificent prints on Ilford Multigrade, a paper which I regard as mediocre at best. The skill of the printer makes a lot more difference than the paper does.
     
  12. Thomas Bertilsson

    Thomas Bertilsson Subscriber

    Messages:
    15,254
    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2003
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    That's just it, though, and I agree with you completely.
    If I look at a Brett Weston print, I tend not to wonder if it's a contact print or an enlargement. I just admire the art. Don't care about what paper he used either... :smile:
    What I want to celebrate is diversity. That there are so many options (still). Something for everybody to be excited about. That's what matters.
     
  13. doughowk

    doughowk Subscriber

    Messages:
    1,766
    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2003
    Location:
    Jacksonville
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I won't be giving up my enlarging paper; but, after seeing M&Ps prints up close, and after seeing what Michael Smith can do with a couple of my 8X10 negatives, I am far more willing to lug out the big beasts. Lodima is a paper that has been worth waiting for. It makes contact printing both easier and more expressive.
     
  14. Sponsored Ad
  15. ilya1963

    ilya1963 Member

    Messages:
    676
    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2004
    Shooter:
    8x10 Format
    Without a fear ...

    diversity of one thing could be mind blowing if you allow it to....
     
  16. Mahler_one

    Mahler_one Member

    Messages:
    1,153
    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2002
    Not too many of us have access to an 8x10 enlarger, and thus if we shoot 8x10, contact printing is the only option. I was with Doug and Mike at the recent Michael and Paula workshop, and of course, after looking at Michael's and Paula's prints "live" and "up close", the results with Azo and Amidol are-de minimus-exceptional. Tom and C6 have a wonderful point though: There are great prints made using an enlarger. Furthermore, from many examples that I have noted from fellow APUG members, there is some GREAT work being done by many of our members. Of course, not having the opportunity to hold and examine these prints ( as opposed to viewing over the internet ), makes comparison with Azo prints impossible. We are lucky to have the opportunity to make our photographs using diverse techniques, and one would agree that it is hard to say that one method is "always superior" ( my words ) to another. However, allow me to repeat that Mike was also with us at the workshop. His work with many different techniques ( Platinum, Azo, contact printing on traditional enlarging paper, etc. ) was exceptional, and illustrates the points that many of us are making: It is the artist who is using the tools, and not the tools that are using the artist. Memorable images can be made in many ways.

    It certainly would be informative to see a series of prints made by John Sexton and compare the range of tones with prints made on Azo using Amidol by a Master using such materials, i.e., Michael or Paula. Would one still be entirely convinced that Azo/Amidol has a higher demonstrable range of tones, and is "better"? Simply wondering without any value judgments...without appearing sexist or silly, the situation might be similar when trying to say which beautiful woman does one favor, i.e., the blonde or the red head. To return to reality, the kinds of objective evaluation of prints and/or negatives produced with chemicals or techniques that are reputed to be "better" might, in fact, show very little differences when viewed under similar conditions by an unbiased audience. The observers would not be able to handle the prints...simply observe two prints of the same subject made from the same negative, framed and matted the same way, lighting the same of course...printed to a similar DMax ( if possible ), etc., etc. Not talking about prints that are of a different "color", i.e., platinum in which one might be able to tell the difference from such color ( unless one could tone a conventional print to mimic the tone of a platinum prints ). However, such objective evaluations are not easily available. I am reminded of a post on APUG which pointed out that such "blind observers" (sic) have not been able to tell the difference from a print made on RC VC paper from one made on FB RC paper. Not talking about longevity, etc...simply saying that both papers processed to archival standards for that particular paper yielded results that could not be differentiated.

    The "upshot" appears to me to be that a given photographer might always think that the techniques he or she uses to produce a photographic that captures their personal "vision" is superior to another technique that might also have been utilized.

    Ed
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 23, 2009
  17. Markus Röhling

    Markus Röhling Member

    Messages:
    32
    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2009
    Location:
    Berlin
    Shooter:
    Large Format
  18. doughowk

    doughowk Subscriber

    Messages:
    1,766
    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2003
    Location:
    Jacksonville
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Michael Smith said he uses a light sufficient to read a newspaper by. At the workshop we were using a Thomas Safelight. At home I've used 25watt bug lights 4-7' away without a problem. Working in such well-lighted conditions is one of the pleasures of using a slow contact paper.
     
  19. EASmithV

    EASmithV Member

    Messages:
    1,926
    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2008
    Location:
    Maryland
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    What happens to Lodima if I dev in Dektol?
     
  20. c6h6o3

    c6h6o3 Member

    Messages:
    3,219
    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2002
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    Any problems I may have with it notwithstanding, I should state that I think Lodima is the best photographic paper in existence, including Azo. I intend to buy a good bit of it. It has denser blacks than Azo, and the color is spectacular. I would never forgive myself if I thought that my criticism, which I only put forward in hopes of improving an already fine product, had dissuaded anyone from buying it.

    Since the death of Bergger VCNB, I know of no enlarging paper which I consider good enough to use. (Yes, I know that Bergger is marketing a paper, but it's not the same.) This is the reason I'm not making any enlargements at present. When I find a good enough paper, I'll begin whittling down the ever burgeoning backlog I have of 6x6 cm negatives that need printing.
     
  21. jgjbowen

    jgjbowen Member

    Messages:
    879
    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2003
    Location:
    Richmond, VA
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    Jim,

    Why not contact print the 6x6 cm negatives? I've seen some jewel-like medium format Azo contact prints by Peter Schrager. I understand Paula also has quite a number of 6x6 Azo prints.
     
  22. Mahler_one

    Mahler_one Member

    Messages:
    1,153
    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2002
    Enlarging on Azo

    Now my interest is peaked!! Can you tell us how you enlarge on Azo paper? At the workshop Michael A. Smith did make a very quick allusion to the fact there IS a light source that some have used to enlarge successfully on Azo paper. Obviously, Azo paper is slow, and the light source would have to be very powerful.

    Ed
     
  23. ilya1963

    ilya1963 Member

    Messages:
    676
    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2004
    Shooter:
    8x10 Format
  24. c6h6o3

    c6h6o3 Member

    Messages:
    3,219
    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2002
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    I don't enlarge on contact paper, which is why I don't enlarge at present. The whole point to the post is that if I cannot get good enough enlarging paper, I just won't enlarge. I will contact print my 6x6 negatives, which can be presented very effectively on a 13x15 or 14x17 mount. And boy, do you get good bang for the buck with 12 images per 8x10 sheet.

    There is an enlarging light source for Azo, but it costs about $3K. I don't know if there are any of them left. M&P have one. BTW, I believe Paula's small format contact prints are 6x7, not 6x6.
     
  25. chrisf

    chrisf Member

    Messages:
    77
    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2004
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    I've contact printed some 6x9 negatives on Lodima and was very happy with the results.
     
  26. jgjbowen

    jgjbowen Member

    Messages:
    879
    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2003
    Location:
    Richmond, VA
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    You have to search for this on the Azo forum, but if you place an order for $5,000 of Lodima, you can pick out one of Paula's prints from the Azo portfolio. Should you order $10,000 you can pick one of Paula's prints AND one of Michael's Azo portfolio prints. I placed a large order yesterday and hope more will follow suit. Let's make this happen!