RC vs FB prints

[paul owen]

I've just started printing in my "new" darkroom!! For the first time i've starte d using FB paper. I've previously only used RC but have been desperate to try f ibre for a long time but have not had the facility for washing/drying. Now I hav e and I must admit to being a bit disappointed with the results! The prints do not have the same luminosity as RC prints and certainly my results do not seem t o warrant the prolonged processing times and the performance required in getting a flat print. Am I missing something? I heard so many good things about fibre prints but when laid side by side with a RC print I know which I prefer. For the record I have used Multigrade 1V in both RC and FB as a comparison. Is it simpl y the case that RC has progressed to a point whereby is an improvement on fibre? I understand the argument for longevity seems to favour fibre paper and that t here are some processes that require its use, but for general use ( I do sell my prints and will shortly exhibit) will RC suffice? I appreciate that this is a question requiring in-depth answers and varied viewpoints but I would be interes ted in your views. Regards Paul

[Paul Mongillo]

Hi Paul

Are you using glossy fiber paper? You should be if you are not. Also spend some time checking out your safelight. Just because RC is faster than fiber does not mean fiber is less likely to fog from your safelight. You can do the "place the coin on the paper" test, but I prefer to expose several sheets of the paper in question like a test strip, but expose it in the dark (safelight off). Then lay the sheets around the darkroom emulsion side up with half of each protected from the light (under a sheet of paper) and the other half fully out in the open. I leave them like this for 10 minutes. If there is a difference between sides on any of the sheets, you have a safelight problem which makes your prints look flat. Also, just because you like a brand in RC, doesn't always mean you will like it in fiber. Good luck.

[Paul Mongillo]

Make sure you turn your safelight back on when you leave the sheets out in the open for 10 minutes.

[paul owen]

For the record I am using glossy paper ( i tried a few sheets of matt and they were even worse!!). My safelight is okay and my chemistry is fresh. Maybe I expected too much from fibre? I have searched through older threads and the general opinion appears to be that fibre is better because it is more archivally stable than RC. There seems little comment on the actual quality of the image. I read all sorts about fibre being aesthetically more pleasing but I really can't see what the fuss is about. Other threads suggest sticking to what suits you, and so far RC wins hands down! But I am still open to views/comments. Regards Paul

[Chris Yeager]

People prefer fibre because it does not have the cheap, plastick-y sheen of RC. RC was invented to make quickie commercial processing easier to wash. I can't imagine a knowledgeable art dealer selling RC fine art prints, unless they are signed by Cindy Sherman or some such name. As you may have noticed, you also have to dry your fibre prints in screens to keep them flat, you cant just hang them with clothespins. Then you have to dry mount them, a costly proposition to do yourself. RC will never progress to be an improvement on fiber, because it's, well, plastic.... Try some other papers, papers have characteristics like film does, you can go nuts matching film, paper and developer... But I love the feel of "real" paper in the wash.... and the feeling that I've made a "real" print.... best-

[mark lindsey]

Paul, I prefer fiber by far, but no one has to be more happy with your prints than you. use what you like and be happy about it.

[Cesar Barreto]

Hi Paul, Probably your're facing the most difficult task on photo appreciation, wich means creating a taste and a sense of quality. For sure, RC prints will stand out easily on side-by-side comparasion, mainly because it has artificially brightened whites that will transform UV light into visible light, contributing greatly to its plasticine look. Even curves can stand close matching and, maybe, even show better values on D-Max and density range. There's no doubt RC prints will satisfy most of your potencial clients. But... it looks like plastic, feels like plastic, behaves like plastic. So it's quite easy to understand why devoted printers still prefer to work with real paper. As mentioned before, it's a sense of quality not just a matter of technical performance. And, by the way, why not to try some other beautiful and rich emulsion, before being so disappointed? Welcome to FB arena!

Cesar B.

[Paul Mongillo]

I still can't let go of the possibility of a problem somewhere in your methods. I have used both Ilford RC and Fiber and the fiber is just more alive. I currently use niether. I'm back to kodak RC and and am completely hooked on Forte fiber. It takes about twice as long for a fiber print to develop (depending on your developer dilution)than an RC print. Are you developing the fiber long enough? Did you calibrate your film processing time to the fiber paper ? Are you turning on the light too soon to check out your print ? Again, fiber may be more sensitive to your lights than the RC. Your safelight may be ok, but light leaks from your enlarger may affect the fiber more than the RC. Also, you may not be able to assume that a contrast 2 filter will produce identical results in RC and fiber. Sorry if I am rambling on, just brain storming on line.

[Steve Baggett]

Paul, my experience with RC vs FB is similar to yours. Ignoring the archival issues, I was never able to see that FB was at all better. Until now, I dared not speak of such on this forum lest we be declared a heretic. Scrutinize those replies to your posts wherein RC is derrided and FB is praised and see how many of the arguments are based on explicit, technical reasons (besides archivability) and how many are not. One reply has already conceeded some objective measures of RC may be better. I will say no more.

[David F. Stein]

http://members.aol.com/onelucent/MLP/MLP.html

Ah, ah, ah, ah. The intro pix above and the first 2 monochromes (Zofkie Clothing and Window Shades) are scans of RC prints. I like fiber myself but its silly to claim that a beautiful print can't be made on RC paper-the Ilford Portfolio RC post cards are great. One value for RC-the prints on Ilord's Pearl surface seem to scan better on a flatbed scanner than fiber base prints in my experience. Great discussion, as usual. The archival issue is beyond this thread but just following a certain protocol doesn't make some archival-and as inkjet printing advances, a healthy re-examination is nece