Is Emaks Slow To Develop?
For some time I've thought I was giving Emaks FB Glossy
plenty of time to fully develop. I've lately experimented with
contrast control through shorter exposures and longer development.
Now I've found with normal exposures increased density is quite
evident up to at least 100% more development.
Short or long exposures, short or longer development, blacks
have been very good. What's the answer? Dan
You are not alone in this observation. There was an article in the May/June 2004 View Camera magazine comparing multiple papers and developers using developing times ranging from 2 to 6 minutes. Some combinations required the full 6 minutes before it met the author's approval. I think these were his personal visual observations rather than using a densitometer or even a scanner, but I'm confident they are legitimate.
Yes, Emacs is kind of "special" and very old-fashioned. Apart from the difference in between production runs, you've ran into another peculiarity. Once you find the receipe though, the results can be very good indeed. In general these papers are at their best when you want good separation in the shadows, which you seem to have noticed.
But again, the next box of papers can respond in a different way... Emacs paper used to cost substancially less than e.g. Ilford paper, but some of that money had to be used to get on track again when buying a new box of papers.
I use Emaks grade 2 in Ansco 130. I find that 2-2 1/2 minutes is more then enough development time.
My findings may be due to the metol only developer I've been
Originally Posted by Neal
using; Beer's 1. Ansco 120 is a same developer. The two may
be slow with any paper because the metol is not regenerated.
Hydroquinone though does regenerate metol and does it in
situ. I'd think that could only work to speed development.
Glycin may also regenerate metol.
Beer's is similar to A. Adam's split version of Ansco 130.
Both, with the addition of hydroquinone, allow for contrast
control. I'll need to test with one of the blends to verify
my theory. Dan
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
Your abilities with Chemistry are well beyond mine! I wish you success in your endeavors.
I love this paper and use it all the time. My standard developing time is 3 minutes (2 for almost all others) and I sometimes split that between Selectol-Soft and Zone VI Developer. Since that is my standard, all the testing is done with that time, so I seldom if ever find I need to go beyond that.
It's truly wonderful paper, though!
I wonder what you'd find if two exposed
Originally Posted by mmcclellan
the same prints were given 3 and 5 minute
development. I suspect you have made some
similar test. Has the additional development
time made any difference? Dan
Emaks is 2x faster than Forte Polywarmtone Plus if you are discussing projection speed. Tray speed is similar to most other non developer incorporated papers. Two to three min should fully develop the paper tones with LPD, Dektol, or Ilford PQ. Any fiber paper takes about 40s for the entire faint image to appear on the paper.
This is an outstanding paper even if graded. I working around contrast issues by alternating between a condenser and dichro head using grade 2 and 3 without relying on a normal/soft paper developer to control contrast. I appreciate the rich blacks, separated mid-tones, and ability to tone to a light grey brown or cooler print color.
SINCE it's graded you mean...? Okay- I'm a graded paper snob... despite popular opinion - I find I get much greater depth and 'snap' out of graded papers - even compared to the most recent species of multigrade papers. Maybe I'm alone in this.
Originally Posted by Richard Jepsen