PDA

View Full Version : Fomalux FB contact printing paper


Trevor Crone
15th September 2010, 02:14 PM
Silverprint are now stocking this new paper for contact printing. At present only available in one grade, Special, approx. grade 2.

Martin kindly gave me a few sheets to test and I must say I found it just beautiful. Capable of the warmest of tones and tones quickly in selenium with a pronounced colour shift for those after this look.

I found the grade S harder than what I would consider a normal grade 2 compared to Ilford papers. However this could easily be rectified by using soft gradation developers and or water bath technique.

The paper is quite fast for a silver chloride emulsion, especially when compared to Lodima. I would think it is feasible to make projection print with this paper if one has sufficiently bright enlarger lamps. The papers weight is also quite substantial.

Damn, I was only at Silverprint on Monday, now I'll have to return next week:o

http://www.silverprint.co.uk/ProductByGroup.asp?PrGrp=1126

Mark-NY
15th September 2010, 10:34 PM
Trevor - thanks for your comments on this paper. My project for this fall is to do some contact printing of negatives that I have made over the summer - and now I think that I will give this paper a try along with several others. Glad to see that it comes in 25 sheet packs.

Trevor Crone
16th September 2010, 07:17 AM
Hi Mark, I think you will appreciate the paper sizes, Martin informs me the paper is primarily aimed at the US market. I was keen to obtain some 9.5"x12" but it looks as if its only available on special order:(

If you are not already aware there is quite an extensive thread about this paper on the APUG site.

Neil Smith
16th September 2010, 08:10 AM
Hi Trevor

I'm just curios to know why you want the 9.5x12 paper, never having done any contact printing of large format, I was wondering is it because you contact print 10x8 and need a paper big enough to leave a border around the image?
I have been thinking of contact printing 4x5 to see if I like the results, having read lots of positive comments about contact printing, my only fear is I will like it too much, and want to go larger, and start looking at 8x10 and before I know it I'm selling the house to fund my habit:eek:


Neil

Trevor Crone
16th September 2010, 08:21 AM
Hi Trevor

I'm just curios to know why you want the 9.5x12 paper, never having done any contact printing of large format, I was wondering is it because you contact print 10x8 and need a paper big enough to leave a border around the image?
I have been thinking of contact printing 4x5 to see if I like the results, having read lots of positive comments about contact printing, my only fear is I will like it too much, and want to go larger, and start looking at 8x10 and before I know it I'm selling the house to fund my habit:eek:


Neil

Hi Neil, yes for that very reason, so I can have a black border around the image. Usually I trim the black rebate off when printing on 8x10 paper, but I rather like the look of the larger black border. It doesn't suit every image but at least it gives me the option. When I bought Lodima I purchased some 9"x11" which was a one-off.

8x10 - go for it Neil, if you buy S/H it shouldn't cost too much, mind you running cost is pricey:o When I visited Silverprint this week I saw the negative taken on Martin's Deardorff 11"x14"!!! An Ebony 11x14, mmm, (talking to wife) - "it's time to sell the car";)

Barry
16th September 2010, 05:33 PM
Thanks Trevor, I like the sound of this.

Trevor Crone
23rd September 2010, 01:26 PM
Just a brief update on my findings with this excellent paper.

I managed to obtain some 8x10 from Silverprint yesterday and have just managed to print an 8x10 neg. on it.

Because this is quite a fast silver chloride contact paper I was interested to see if my enlarger lamp with lens set at f5.6 (wide open) would give me manageable printing times, I'm pleased to say it does.

With the head at 75cm from the frame I was able to get a printing time of 25 seconds base exposure. All be it with a thinnish neg. (PMK pyro plus). I developed the paper in Ilford's WT diluted 1:9 for 2 minutes which gave the print a lovely warm tone. I liked the look without toning but because the blacks needed some intensification I selenium toned (1:20 dilution) for 2 minutes max. This gave the intensification I was after but started to turn the darker tones a slight reddish-brown. Although I don't find this unpleasant by any means its just I prefer the look of the untoned warmth of this paper.

When I get a bit more time I plan to see if I can projection print with this paper, for it certainly seems fast enough to allow enlargements to be made?

Dave miller
23rd September 2010, 02:09 PM
Just a brief update on my findings with this excellent paper.

I managed to obtain some 8x10 from Silverprint yesterday and have just managed to print an 8x10 neg. on it.

Because this is quite a fast silver chloride contact paper I was interested to see if my enlarger lamp with lens set at f5.6 (wide open) would give me manageable printing times, I'm pleased to say it does.

With the head at 75cm from the frame I was able to get a printing time of 25 seconds base exposure. All be it with a thinnish neg. (PMK pyro plus). I developed the paper in Ilford's WT diluted 1:9 for 2 minutes which gave the print a lovely warm tone. I liked the look without toning but because the blacks needed some intensification I selenium toned (1:20 dilution) for 2 minutes max. This gave the intensification I was after but started to turn the darker tones a slight reddish-brown. Although I don't find this unpleasant by any means its just I prefer the look of the untoned warmth of this paper.

When I get a bit more time I plan to see if I can projection print with this paper, for it certainly seems fast enough to allow enlargements to be made?

Sounds like projection printing should be possible though you may be counting cups of tea rather than elephants.;)

Trevor Crone
23rd September 2010, 03:08 PM
Sounds like projection printing should be possible though you may be counting cups of tea rather than elephants.;)

Absolutely - a paper only for those not in a hurry and have a glass negative carrier ;)

Luis
16th October 2010, 09:35 PM
I found it between 3 and 4 stops slower than Ilford warmtone, also, SP 111 has amazing brilliant blacks with a long gradation for the 90 ISO R they claim.

For those with a durst 670 and a analyzer pro, +41/120 were the first results, but I'm not pretty sure about contrast, I should check the contrast test under sunlight.

DougHowk
8th February 2011, 06:57 PM
Finally got around to trying this paper. Comparing it to Lodima, seems 2-3 times faster. Most of my 8X10 and 7X17 negs have high DR suitable for pt/pd printing. Using Moersch Selectol Soft, I can easily print them on the Fomalux (as well as Lodima grade #2). Prints are in developer with agitation for at least 2.5 minutes. The print has nice tone and good clarity. Ordered more.

JimW
9th February 2011, 04:48 PM
7X17 negs What's the camera? Custom or self manufactured? I want one.......

Trevor Crone
9th February 2011, 06:16 PM
What's the camera? Custom or self manufactured? I want one.......

I'm sure Doug will post, but in the meantime Lotus make a 7x17 and available from Linhof & Studio; http://www.linhofstudio.com/products/cameras/lotus/lotus.html

DougHowk
9th February 2011, 10:04 PM
Jim, I can not recommend my 90+ year old Korona. Its shakier than me. But I do like the format.

JimW
10th February 2011, 04:09 PM
http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=17878&page=4
About half way down the page.
I have an Arca....mmmm! But as i have a 617 RFH for it, and nothing that could enlarge a 7x17, it does seem extravagant. Still dreams are free.....

Domingo
21st July 2014, 02:35 PM
Let me resurrect the thread to comment a problem I had last week when printing with this paper.

I like Fomalux SP 111. Even sometimes it's slooooooow to print, images on it are very nice to my taste.

I bought four 10 sheets envelopes from Fomafoto last November; paper lot number is 060148/02. I wanted to print my exchange print in this paper; I finished the opened box I had (different paper lot number) and then opened a new box.

I printed first test strips, developed them in Defender 55D, stop in plain water and fixed in plain hypo (15%). Then I began to wash the strips with plain tap water at 25C approximately; I use a fish tank pump to constantly wave the water. After a bit more than one hour washing, the image began to disappear. I stopped the print session. I forgot some test strips inside water in the tray and after two hours the paper was absolutely white.

I wrote a mail to Fomafoto and Slavomir answered quickly: he has no reason to explain what happened to my paper, maybe I washed it for too long. He will pass the problem to Foma factory.

Do you think I washed the paper for too long?

Luis
21st July 2014, 10:06 PM
Too hot more than too long, gelatin swelling can be a trouble with certain coatings

Barry
20th March 2016, 10:45 AM
Anyone tried this new paper...

https://www.fotoimpex.de/shopen/photopaper/adox-lupex-silver-chloride-contact-paper-natural-gloss-8-inchx10-inch-25-sheets-gradation-normal-3.html

Looks interesting?

Miha
20th March 2016, 01:09 PM
Not yet Barry. I have ordered a 5 sheet pack last week (free shipping from Fotoimpex worldwide on this item).

Mike O'Pray
20th March 2016, 01:24 PM
Interesting. I recall in the 1950s a friend's father being able to contact print from MF negs(6x9) in evening daylight in his hallway which had no windows in it but allowed enough light from another room to enter so you could see perfectly well.

Would this stuff be insensitive enough for this or if not then a small incandescent bulb in a closed room?

Mike

Miha
20th March 2016, 01:37 PM
Mike, your friend's father must have been using a gaslight paper:
http://notesonphotographs.org/index.php?title=Gaslight_Paper

Mike O'Pray
20th March 2016, 08:13 PM
Mike, your friend's father must have been using a gaslight paper:
http://notesonphotographs.org/index.php?title=Gaslight_Paper

I was afraid you'd say that, Miha. So the benefit of this new Contact paper compared to placing a large neg on normal paper is simply the extra time it takes to expose it, giving extra time for any dodging required or are there other benefits?

What would you use as the light source? Could a neg mask minus any neg in an enlarger be used as it is for normal contact sheets with the bellows raised as it is for a 8x10 contact sheet for 36 frames of 135?

Mike

alexmuir
20th March 2016, 09:04 PM
An enlarger with empty carrier will work. I also saw an article recommending a 200 or 300 Watt bulb. I want to try that myself, but traditional bulbs are quite hard to find. My results with the enlarger were not very good. I may need to refine my technique.
Alex.

Barry
21st March 2016, 08:41 AM
An enlarger with empty carrier will work. I also saw an article recommending a 200 or 300 Watt bulb. I want to try that myself, but traditional bulbs are quite hard to find. My results with the enlarger were not very good. I may need to refine my technique.
Alex.

The data sheet suggests an incandescent bulb around 100w, see attached.

alexmuir
21st March 2016, 08:50 AM
Thanks Barry. That might make the bulb search a bit easier. It's a well written data sheet.
Alex

Miha
21st March 2016, 05:27 PM
are there other benefits?



I would hope they are.:D

Mike O'Pray
21st March 2016, 06:16 PM
I am still left puzzled about the advantage of this Lupex sheet. A 100 watt bare bulb placed over the contact print gives time for dodging and burning because the paper is much slower than ordinary FBMG such as Ilford but the extra light compensates so the time is comfortable but not excessive as it would be with an enlarger.

However ordinary FB is much faster so the lower level of light from an enlarger will give a similar time presumably and one which can be varied by the lens aperture so still giving time for comfortable dodging and burning?

This leaves only the extra fine grain in this paper compared to MG FB as its advantage, I think.

I wonder if there is a really appreciable difference compared to MGFB as contact paper under an enlarger?

Sorry if this sounds curmudgeonly but it seems crucial to me otherwise why bother?

Yes I recognise that this pre-supposes that the user has access to an enlarger. If not then of course this paper provides a benefit which would be denied to a user of faster MGFB under a bare 100 watt bulb which would give extremely short times.

On the other hand would a 25/15 watt bare bulb give the same or similar time with MGFB?

Mike

alexmuir
21st March 2016, 07:08 PM
Mike, this new Adox paper is aimed at people making contact prints from large format negatives. You can use either an enlarger, or a bare bulb as a light source. The emulsion is of a different type from enlarging paper, and produces better results in its intended use. It's not really much use for enlarging, although that would be possible if you could put up with very long exposures. The results, however, are likely to be inferior to an enlargement made on paper designed for that purpose. I can't imagine anyone buying this Adox paper, or Fomalux, for anything other than contact printing. The advantages in that regard are fine grain and a long tonal scale. I understand that, if you produce a suitable negative, contact prints on this type of paper will be very impressive. I haven't quite achieved that yet, but I've been seeking advice recently to set me on the right direction. I have made contact prints of 4x5 negatives on enlarging paper, and I'm not that keen on them.
Alex

Mike O'Pray
21st March 2016, 07:29 PM
Thanks Alex. That explains it.

Mike