Years ago I used this paper but it came under a different name...Luminous, I believe. The graded papers were lovely. I tried the VC version but could only get a very narrow range of contrasts. The highest contrast I could get was about a grade 3. Maybe they've changed their characteristics over the years. Can anyone who uses this paper let me know the maximum contrast they can obtain? Thanks!
I assume that you are asking about the Kentmere neutral-tone VC paper. I have found that Kentmere VC paper has a full range of contrast levels, with a brighter white base than papers like Agfa Classic. It is fine paper that works well. Whether you want to use it or not will to some degree depend on your aesthetic judgement concerning its white base. That's a question which can only be answered by you as you actually put it to a test.
Thanks, Michael. Yes, I am referring to the neutral tone VC paper. I'll pick up a small package and test it...it'll be pretty hard though to convert me from Forte Polygrade V, my paper of choice...it just got a little too expensive for me.
I have been using Kentmere Fineprint as a replacement for Brilliant and am quite happy with it. It is an excellent paper.
If you have any queries contact Kentmere directly, I met some of their reps at Focus U.K. this year and they couldn't have been more helpful. ten times better than Ilford. When I asked an Ilford rep about 11 x 14 film availability in the U.K. I was told "you and three others" . Guess what paper I buy now.
Pete.
I tried the Kentmere VC paper recently. You can buy it from Freestyle (rebranded as ARISTA II) for a song. The tone is lovely, but I found that 3.5 was about the most contrast I could get from it (compared to Ilford VC). They had a test of Kentmere in some magazine last year (Darkroom Techniques?) and found the same thing. Nice paper but very limited contrast range. It may work well for some folks, but it didn't for me.Originally Posted by Andrew O'Neill
Erich Hoeber
Erich Hoeber Photography
Fred Newman reported on his tests of VC papers in the Nov/Dec '05 issue of Photo Techniques. He described the Kentmere VC as having the shortest contrast range of any of the papers tested - "from about a soft grade 1 to a hard grade 3". For comparison, he characterized the range of Ilford MG IV FB as "from 00 to a hard 5".
By any chance are those of you saying that Kentmere does not have enough contrast range using a cold light head enlarger? I ask because I am and have read this in the Kentmere Fineprint VC FB specs, "Fineprint VC is designed for use with tungsten or tungsten halogen light sources. Cold light source enlargers can be used, but they may limit the contrast range achievable."
I rarely use more than a 2.5 or 3 Ilford filter. For this it is fine, but every so often I want to split grade print with 5 and 00. Doing that I have a problem. For me this has been situations where I had more zones in the negative than the paper has. Specifically snow on the roof of a greenhouse and rusty bands of metal in the same image. A panoramic waterfall with shadows near the edges. I have gotten some satisfaction from reshooting my 8x10 and 7x17 T max 400, over exposing and under developing in the Jobo with Rollo Pyro.
Over on APUG Simon Galley has announced that in early 2007 Ilford expects to have print paper that dries flat without curl. For about six months I have been agonizing whether to buy a used Seal dry mount press (models 360-550) at about a $1,000 that will handle 20x24 inch prints to flatten out the curl. I think the new Ilford paper will handle the contrast and the curl problem. The fact that it is more expensive than Kentmere will be absorbed by not buying the press. I do like the light silvery look of Kentmere, but I think the Ilford will win out. Without stealing the thread, how do you feel they compare?
My two cents worth.
John
It hasn't changed then. Thanks.The tone is lovely, but I found that 3.5 was about the most contrast I could get from it
By any chance are those of you saying that Kentmere does not have enough contrast range using a cold light head enlarger? I ask because I am and have read this in the Kentmere Fineprint VC FB specs, "Fineprint VC is designed for use with tungsten or tungsten halogen light sources. Cold light source enlargers can be used, but they may limit the contrast range achievable."
Shouldn't make any difference if one has the V54 tubes...which I do.
I'll keep spending my money on good old Forte Polygrade V. Thanks all for the insight.
While the Kentmere paper topic is still alive has anyone tried their VC resin coated paper with any form of success? Any coments or observations would be of interest. Thanks Gerry
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks