Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,765   Posts: 1,516,350   Online: 1019
      
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 13
  1. #1
    Max
    Max is offline

    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    97

    enlarging paper most like Azo?

    So I'm taking a printing course from the local art school (I'm completely self-taught, as in, no one that knows anything has every seen any of my prints), but there doesn't seem to be a place where I can contact print Azo with my trusty work lamp like I do at home (everyone else is enlarging).

    The teacher, while fully supportive of my desire to use Azo, suggested that I use an enlarging paper for class, and then transfer the skills to Azo.

    My concern is that I'm going to end up with negatives that will be way too thin for Azo - or am I wrong? Is there an enlarging paper that would be a viable substitute for Azo?

    (I'm also a little concerned that there was a little review of the connection between shutter speed, f-stop, and ISO - everyone can move at their own pace, but I was feeling like I might be behind because I've never fired up a densitometer or making curves... guess I should adjust my expectations.)

  2. #2
    Alex Hawley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Kansas, USA
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    2,895
    Images
    63
    Quote Originally Posted by Max
    My concern is that I'm going to end up with negatives that will be way too thin for Azo - or am I wrong? Is there an enlarging paper that would be a viable substitute for Azo?
    Yes, there is a viable solution to your situation Max. I just completed running a comparison of a contact print made on Azo and Iford MG IV. The details and results are posted in this thread: http://www.apug.org/forums/showthrea...0&page=1&pp=10

    In fact, if you want to save a little more money, I would recommend using Adorama fiber-based paper for your class. Its very, very close to Ilford's.

    Make your negatives with Azo in mind. Don't expose them for enlarging. That way, they will directly transfer. The enlarging paper you use won't know the difference.

    To summarize the results of the comparison I did, the Ilford print was close to Azo, close enough for anyone's practical purposes. There are noticeable differences which illustrate the edge Azo holds. But for the situation you have, you can do quite well with the substitute.
    Semper Fi & God Bless America
    My Photography Blog

  3. #3
    Max
    Max is offline

    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    97
    Cool! Thanks!!

    Sadly, I even read (part of) that thread, but didn't remember since I wasn't ever planning to use an enlarger...

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    6,242
    The tests that I have done indicate that there is no enlarging paper that will duplicate the exposure scale of Azo when one takes the same grades of papers into consideration.

    Grade two Azo will have an exposure scale of 1.65. Grade three Azo will have an exposure scale of 1.30.

    Most enlarging papers will fall into a 1.25 at grade two when using a diffusion light source enlarger. More nearly 1.15 when one uses a condensor light source enlarger.

    Now if one wanted to have a dual purpose negative it would seem that a 1.25 density range negative would fit grade three Azo and grade two diffusion enlarged print. This does not take into account the slope of the characteristic curves of the two respective papers.

    I feel confident that irregardless of what one may perceive by visual inspection that when these two prints are subjected to reflection density measurements that there will be a measureable difference.

  5. #5
    galyons's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    San Francisco Bay Area
    Posts
    273
    Images
    2
    Sorry Donald,
    But I cannot not comment. Photographic prints are for viewing by real live, (or close to IT), people. If the viewer cannot see a difference, any measurable difference is meaningless. A densitometer is a calibration tool, what it sees is not material to a print already being viewed by a person.

    That being said, I, purely subjectively, have not seen an enlarging paper that matches the long tonal scale of Azo.

    Sorry, but I have had to listen to too many years of audio technobabble, " Measures great, sounds like s#!t !" Measurements are a means, not an end.

    Regards,
    Geary

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Düsseldorf, Germany
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    1,021
    Images
    1
    New Grade 2 AZO's exposure scale is unlike any other paper I have used in the past - it feels similar to alt process than silver. The key is getting the negative right for it. If this is done then there is no substitute. Of course, negatives that fall short of this can still be printed on AZO, AND other silver papers. It is these negatives that can be used as AZO substitutes.
    Francesco

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    6,242
    Quote Originally Posted by galyons
    Sorry Donald,
    But I cannot not comment. Photographic prints are for viewing by real live, (or close to IT), people. If the viewer cannot see a difference, any measurable difference is meaningless. A densitometer is a calibration tool, what it sees is not material to a print already being viewed by a person.

    That being said, I, purely subjectively, have not seen an enlarging paper that matches the long tonal scale of Azo.

    Sorry, but I have had to listen to too many years of audio technobabble, " Measures great, sounds like s#!t !" Measurements are a means, not an end.

    Regards,
    Geary
    Geay,

    I agree wholeheartedly with your position that prints are for viewing. The fact still remains that if the negative does not match the characteristics of Azo then one would be inclined to think that using an enlarging paper could approximate the print that Azo is capable of printing.

    Taking that a step further if one were to take a print on Azo (that was not printed to the potential of the paper) and compare it side by side with a enlarging paper print then it would appear that the enlarging paper compared very favorably with Azo. This would not be a valid comparison, in my opinion.

    The reason that I know this is that I have seen prints that have not been printed to this potential on Azo. It is very easy for one who is accustomed to an enlarging paper print to mistakenly think that the Azo print is good when in fact it isn't anywhere near where it could be.

    Now how does one know if the negative matches the characteristics of the paper? I think that it is by testing the characteristics of the paper and then producing a negative that is in capable of utilizing those characteristics.

    Yes, you are correct that a densitiometer is a calibration tool. An important one, in my opinion. So it appears that you and I are saying the same thing.

  8. #8
    Max
    Max is offline

    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    97
    I'm just looking for something that's going to get me close enough for class - not an actual substitute. I can live with it if negs that that print well for me on Azo at home block up a bit in class.

  9. #9
    David A. Goldfarb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Honolulu, Hawai'i
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    17,140
    Images
    20
    Try Cachet/Maco Expo RF Graded. Of course nothing is quite like Azo, but Maco Expo RF has a nice density range, is great at holding shadow detail, and like Azo, it responds well to amidol (I use Smith's formula for enlarging papers with Expo) and water bath controls and tones very well. You can get it from freestylecamera.com.

  10. #10
    c6h6o3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    3,155
    Images
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by Max
    My concern is that I'm going to end up with negatives that will be way too thin for Azo - or am I wrong? Is there an enlarging paper that would be a viable substitute for Azo?
    I've made prints on Bergger VCCB paper which rival my Azo prints. I have one negative which necessitates a water bath with new Grade 2 Azo but with which I can produce a nearly indistinguishable contact print on the Bergger. I used an Aristo cold light head with Kodak Polycontrast filters. If not for the warm tone of the Bergger paper I probably couldn't tell the difference. So I would definitely make my negatives to print well on Azo and adjust the contrast on the enlarging paper to suit as needed for your class.

    My Windows installation bit the dust tonight. If I can get my scanner going tomorrow night, I'll post the two prints.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin