Thanks for the clarification Tom...appreciated. I have not yet used the warm tone Ilford FB VC paper...I can get just enough pleasant warm tone with the Moersch Sepia developer.
Your prints continue to be an inspiration for all of us Tom.
In Tim Rudman's Book he states 3 minutes at 1:9 dilution a minimum for archival benefits. On both MGIV and MGWT this will produce a color change, though not unpleasant. And with MGIV I usually tone twice this amount of time anyway. MGWT will do amazing splits with selenium at the 1:9 dilution after about 6-8 minutes the shadows are plummy brown and the highlights a coolish silver. There is a moment in time depending on the photograph where the shadow tones begin to creep into the midtones. Pulled at this point it is just beautiful!!.. for the right image of course.
Originally Posted by Mahler_one
When I look at the prints in my hall behind glass, which are tipped in, not drymounted, I see the uneven reflection of light from the fact the print is not perfectly flat. I see the sparkling irregular surface of the FB print. When looking at the "image" it is hard to tell the difference. But can you tell the difference from an oblique view where the light skates over the surface?
Originally Posted by Katie
If this is also satisfying, then great. But I imagine you might be able to see a difference.
you need to washagainsfter selenium toning.
I have tremendous regard for Dr. Rudman. However, I wonder how he has reached the conclusion that he seems so certain about. Indeed, what experimental model CAN be used to ascertain "how much and for how long" ( sic ) is necessary. Until such model is verified and subject to study, all of the information that represent opions might be just that: Opinions without a firm basis in fact. I am NOT trying to be critical or dismissive, but once more, only posing questions that appear to have no answer that is based upon scientically verifiable facts.
I seldom tone my prints, since I seldom need either the color change or the archival properties toning gives. Color change and archival qualities are really the only reasons for toning. It does not make prints more consistent. In fact, it adds another variable.
I think the vast majority of papers have a more pleasing color cast (or lack of unpleasing cast) when given light toning than when completely untoned. YMMV of course.
Even just 30-60 seconds in KRST 1+20 is enough to reduce any funky cast left by the development process.
Selenium toner itself has the notion of a snatch point - it'll keep cycling in and out the longer the toning process goes on, where the "cycles" will reduce in intensity as the overall tint approaches colder magenta as the ultimate cast. Grabbing it at somewhere around 90-180 seconds usually works well, but it can also be used longer as a utilitarian to lock in shadows and bottom mids such that a successive toner (brown for instance) has less silver to affect. This doesn't necessarily need to be for a crazy split-tone goal, but instead to help control polysulfide or sepia toners.
Remember too that KRST can also be used the same way but instead followed by bleach to punch up mids/highlights without affecting the shadows - a form of chemical expansion.
I prefer working with fibre paper. I like the tonal range, the quality and the feel of the paper. It is much, more work than RC when one's protocol involves processing for optimun permanence which is what I endeavour to do according to Ilford.
I tone with selenium to a) remove the olive green cast; and b) to bring the print to optimum permanence.
I like both Ilford MG4 fibre glossy and their new MG Art 300. But I am beginning to think that each paper is best suited to certain types of images.
I recently also printed some 16x20 prints ... boy do I like this size. However, I used RC paper as it was much easier to work with at this size and also the cost is another consideration.
I have found that 11x14 is now my workable (but not limited to), print size.
One paper that I am really hoping to work with in the near future is ILFOBROM GALERIE FB
So because of the way I work, and the materials I prefer to work with, yes, selenium toning is an important part of my practice.
I've found that aside from the longer wash time, which I don't necessarily need to be around for, and the post-dry pressing that fiber is not a huge amount of work more. Sure, development and washing take physically more time with fiber and RC is a bit easier to work with overall, but if you break it all down FB only ends up being about 25-50% more work from easel to archival box.