It is the colour sensitivity of the Black and White paper that makes printing colour negatives somewhat hit or miss. The orange mask decreases contrast generally, and different negatives may be predominately of colours that the Black and White paper has little or no sensitivity to...
And let's not forget that VC papers' contrast changes whit the color of the light projected on them. Using color negatives means that some parts of the picture will effectively have different contrast grades from others.
I have never seen an ILford paper with a logo on the back, so someone is pulling your leg. Nonethe less that is not important. You need to use a filter to boost the contrast, think above 3.5
the times will be long due to the orange mask of the film.
biggest problem I encountered doing this some time ago is the tones did not match a normal B&W interpretation. Reds and especially peoples skin used to come out weird. I have also printed some B&W negs on colour paper and ended up with a 'toned' monochrome print.
There is still panchromatic paper produced - Wephota Equitone, which is sensitive to light of any colour and is designed specifically for work with colour negatives.
You should probably consider traditional B&W safelights unusable with this kind of paper.
The last time I printed a colour neg on B&W paper was about 10 years ago. I recall that exposure times were long and that I had no patience for it. Multigrade RC paper was what I used back then. The results were pretty decent. The orange cast acted like a contrast filter of sorts if I recall correctly.
I just printed a color neg this weekend, and I would say results were just ok, not great. Printed on Ilford MGWT in Dektol, toned w/ KRST 1:20.
The reason I wanted to try it because I wasn't happy with the color cast I had on the original (which you can also see if you click on the link), but have very mixed feelings about digital conversions. Actually I have mixed feelings about the analog method as well...I feel like I should be trying to shoot color better or simply use b/w film rather than try to change what I've got. Anyway, I had to bump up the contrast quite a bit as it seemed flat without a filter, but 160S is a fairly subtle film and the added contrast just seems to defeat the purpose. I think I also printed too dark for the subsequent toning. But...well, there's my example.
Last edited by naugastyle; 10-26-2009 at 12:46 PM. Click to view previous post history.