B&W paper chemistry study

[Juraj Kovacik]

I use to use Ilfrod Multigrade, but now I'm working only with Ilford PQ - I like its generall results more, its tonality . I'm printid on Ilford or Foma papers.

[pavelww]

This is an assignment from a college professor who formed us into 3 teams of about 8 people per team. My team is to look characteristics and pros/cons of all chemistry. Other teams doing film, papers. Within my chemistry team, I'm doing a select number of chemistries for paper. The assignment was to research via photogs, labs, net, etc. There isn't time (or money) to try all these chemicals out, as much as I'd like to. This is not marketing research and will strictly be used to report out at class on these chems.

Thanks to those who have responded with info on the chems, with whom I'll share my results. Appreciate any more input.

Pavelww

[Max]

Wow. That's kind of like a culinary school telling you to research all the kinds of mushrooms (or whatever) by asking people to talk about them.

[rakuhito]

alright. i'll bite -- if only to make some pro arguements for agfa neutol, only to then veer off into inanity.

agfa neutol is awesome. in my book the best general developer around. it's cheap, once diluted for use lasts quite a long time, is better than most for the environment, and comes in liquid form, i.e. no chemical mixing which is safer and more convenient.

in the past i always just used the tried and true dektol, but the mixing is a pain -- especially with the high temperature and waiting for it to cool - though one day i did figure out i could just dilute the fresh mix with cold water... (sometimes i think that photography, especially the technical stuff, is a path of minor epiphanies; or as homer simpson might say 'doh!').

i never cared for ilford products. no reason really. i'd try a roll of film, or the developer or whatever and it just never stuck with me as something to do again. that was back in the day when i was still thinking hard about f-stops, so figuring out why hp5 made my pictures look sucky and tmy didn't was a bit beyond me (plus there wasn't nice places on the internets to ask such things). whereas agfa products just fit me a lot better - meaning that everything just came out right. i don't know. i say this only because i think many photographers just, for whatever reason, find a film/developer/paper/developer combo that works - and sometimes that combo is by accident and circumstance. and, you know, once things are working it's best to not question the fundamentals.

so, yes, back to my point: as an everyday run of the mill developer agfa neutol rocks.

[Deckled Edge]

Here's a post that I made about Edwal Ultra Black last December:

I did some testing last night with Ilford MG RC and MG IV FB. This is just a first test with a single neg but it appeared that I could back off a half a grade over the same print souped in Dektol and still get a solid D-Max while seeing a slightly expanded range in the lighter tones. In other words, the shadows printed like a 2 1/2 while the highlights printed like a 2. I'm looking forward to trying it with a wider variety negs.
I tested using a 1:11 dilution and a 2 1/2 minute developing time at around 70ºf.
*********
Since then, I have switched to using Polymax Fine Art paper in the less expensive and more ubiquitous Dektol 1:2 and have found the results excellent and IMHO, superior.

I agree. The old "desert island" question of what one combination would you take if you had only one.... I have used almost nothing but PMFA FD for 5 years, and Dektol was just fine. I have recently tried Edwal Ultra Black, and I like it too, but not enough to justify the difficulty obtaining it--it's special order at my camera shop. The discount stores won't ship liquids to residences. I ordered enough for a year or two, but I could go back to Dektol tomorrow.

I liked Selectol Soft when using graded paper, but it has little utility with MG. It has a warm tone which is rarely to my liking. If I want brown I use palladium or Kallitype.

Just as a man who wears two watches doesn't know which to trust, the photographer who knows a little about a dozen developers, in the end, knows nothing.

[hansbeckert]

Most paper developers are fairly similar. It's pointless to do this as a survey. You should do the comparsions yourself.

[Alex Hawley]

" the photographer who knows a little about a dozen developers, in the end, knows nothing."

What a line! You should use that as your APUG signature!

[jnanian]

i have been using a developer for between 5 and 7 years called ansco 130. it isn't on your list. it isn't too expensive, has a long tonal range, works very well dilute as it does straight, works with film as well as paper, and has a HUGE shelf life ( i just finished stock solution i mixed maybe more than 1 1/2 years ago). in a tray it will last about 30 days.

[hansbeckert]

Your 'professor' sounds a little 'kooky' to me, or else you have completely misunderstood the nature of the assignment. There is no point to this except as a usage survey.

[Jorge]

Your 'professor' sounds a little 'kooky' to me, or else you have completely misunderstood the nature of the assignment. There is no point to this except as a usage survey.

Thank you, I thought I was the only one to whom this assigment did not make sense...