Contact printing with Lodima

[swmcl]

Hi,

Can I get some sage advice please ... I'm wanting to contact print without an enlarger. I believe Lodima is a very good paper for this. Photo Formulary sells a specific developer for the Lodima paper. I have TF5 and am wondering if this is the right fixer for the paper. If there is simething better please advise.

There is a datasheet somewhere (I just saw it ! But do you think I can find it as I write this post ?) that says "Do not use a Rapid fixer with Lodima" ... and TF5 is a rapid fixer. Perhaps it meant a rapid acidic fixer ?

I plan to develop in a Expert 3005 8x10 sheets or smaller.

Rgds,

Steve

[Doug Howk]

Both Lodima and Fomalux are silver chloride papers suitable for contact printing. I've used Ansco PF 130 developer and alkaline fixers (TF4 & 5) with both. For Lodima info, would suggest checking out the AZO Forum that Michael Smith & Paula Chamlee host.

[MIke Sherck]

Lodima was developed with Michael Smith and Paula Chamlee, who are advocates of Amidol. I'd give amidol a try.

Mike

[swmcl]

Thanks guys,

I'm still trying to sort my way through the site mentioned. I don't see any 'howtos' as I might expect. THe 'writings' section seems to not be as updated as it could be.

All good.

[Rick Olson]

Hi Steve,

I am contact printing using Lodima 2 and 3 with a bulb hanging over a desk attached to a timer, developing in Photographers Formulary PF-130 and fixing in Photographers Formulary TF-5 for 60 seconds. It does not require any specific developer and all should typically work fine. Just get to work and enjoy printing!

Rick

[swmcl]

Thanks for the spank Rick !

[Greg Y]

Steve, I use TF5 & have used TF4. it is an alkaline fixer. I've also used Amidol , Ansco 130 / & the old Neutol WA with good results. You may not see 'updates' in the 'howtwos' since M & P use Amidol & have streamlined their working method over years with stunning results. You will however find lots of info if you google Lodima / Azo/ etc. I also use a lightbulb hanging next two 2 enlargers... the contact prints with Azo or Lodima do give jaw-dropping results.

[John Bowen]

Steve, I use TF5 & have used TF4. it is an alkaline fixer. I've also used Amidol , Ansco 130 / & the old Neutol WA with good results. You may not see 'updates' in the 'howtwos' since M & P use Amidol & have streamlined their working method over years with stunning results. You will however find lots of info if you google Lodima / Azo/ etc. I also use a lightbulb hanging next two 2 enlargers... the contact prints with Azo or Lodima do give jaw-dropping results.

Ditto! I've used TF5 with both Azo and Lodima for 3+ years. Watch the capacity and you'll be fine.

[swmcl]

Thanks guys,

On the M & P website there is a page which has some exposure details for Azo. I've just purchased the Lodima and I'm going to go for a 150W halogen worklight to hang from the shed roof. The website mentions a 300W bulb for 10 to 30 secs. I reckon a 150W halogen is a similar such device. It'll be about a metre or 1.5 metres from the contact printer itself for around the same time.

I also see that I should develop for around 30 secs in Amidol with agitation and then put the print into a water bath without agitation. I've ordered grade 3 I believe to do this method in particular as I'm using Pyrocat HD FP4 and the negatives are not as contrasty as with other combinations.

Cheers,

[chuck461]

A few years back there was some contaminated Amidol that had been imported from China. Prints made with this developer would show stains. I had this problem with a PF kit. I'm wondering what kind of luck people have had more recently.

Steve, as I understand it, M&P use an outdated and somewhat fogged film (Kodak Super XX). This means that their negatives are more dense than most people make, requiring more exposure. Don't be surprised if you end up needing much less exposure than M&P.

I hope this helps.
Chuck

[Bruce Barlow]

Lodima is lovely. Michael is adamant about NOT using Dektol - he says the print color is terrible. That said, I've tried it, and true to Dektol it's a cooler color than, certainly, Ansco 130 and amidol (both of which I've also used).

I have amidol, and use it, and follow Michael's example of the "one glove" technique, which keeps my fingernaails from turning black (I am not a Goth).

I also like Fine Art VersaPrint II, from the Formulary. It's a glycin-based developer that I prefer for just about every paper I would ever use. Since glycin oxidizes, mix up your developer, store it in liter-sized plastic drink bottles, and in my experience it will keep for at least three years. Dilute 1:1, or 1:2 water, depending on your methods. Ansco 130 keeps likewise. Both have huge capacities - you can run a lot of prints through them before they get tired.

In any event, try Lodima.

[Jan Pedersen]

150W will in my experience be to much light for the Lodima paper of course it depends on the distance also. Lodima is a much faster paper than Azo although they are both slow compared to Silver Gelatin papers.
For Azo i have used 300W bulb but for Lodima i found that 75W was the best compromise if you need some time to work on the print. my light bulbs are 2 feet above the printing frame.

You may not need to use a water bath, it is just an added benefit from Amidol that it will continue to develop even if you move the paper from the developer to a water bath, by doing so you can reduce the contrast and with experimentation of your timing in the developer find the best tonal range for your print. 30 seconds in Amidol before the water bath is long, the print will have developed close to completion in 30 seconds and there will be very little change after that.
One full minute in Amidol work well for a completely developed print.


As for the Chinese Amidol, it is correct that there is a yellowish stain in the first couple of minutes in the wash but if you filter the developer through a coffee filter before use the stain will disapear very quick.

[blueribbontea]

I have both grades of Lodima and develop in Amidol. Some of my older negatives are just too soft to print even on the grade 3. For that I switch to Ilford Warmtone and develop also in Amidol. Overall I am well satisfied with the Amidol developer and the Lodima paper. I get my Amidol from Artcraft and have never got a bad batch. And I know it goes against the common tale that "amidol oxidises rapidly and is only good for a single session" but I commonly pour the developer into an accordion bottle, squeeze out the air and save it for a second and sometimes a third session. One thing to note, Lodima seems to have a tendency to flake off at the paper cut edges so requires careful handling. Well worth the effort.

Bill

[Greg Y]

Bill, I had the flaking problem on the test run of Lodima but haven't broken into my stash of the newer stuff.... Does it still have that issue? I used to print 5x7 negs on a full sheet....but now I cut both Lodima & Azo in half. The Azo stock is dwindling....but man I love it.

[Sal Santamaura]

...Lodima is a much faster paper than Azo although they are both slow compared to Silver Gelatin papers...Both Azo and Lodima are gelatin silver papers. They are slow compared to enlarging papers, which are also gelatin silver. The difference is that Azo and Lodima contact-speed papers employ silver chloride emulsions, while enlarging papers use silver bromide or mixed silver bromide + chloride emulsions.

[Jon Shiu]

I use a 60W with 8x10 AZO and it works fine.

Jon

[blueribbontea]

Bill, I had the flaking problem on the test run of Lodima but haven't broken into my stash of the newer stuff.... Does it still have that issue? I used to print 5x7 negs on a full sheet....but now I cut both Lodima & Azo in half. The Azo stock is dwindling....but man I love it.

Greg: My pack of Grade 3, which I received a few months ago, has the flaking problem. I was lucky enough to get 1000 sheets of unopened 5X7 AZO grade 2 from a firend who found it at a yard sale, exp. 1972, and it prints perfectly. The only difficulty is a lot of curl. I use these sheets to test before I use an expensive sheet of Lodima. I've found that the flaking happens whether I cut the 8X10s or not.

[Greg Y]

Thank you Blueribbon, I was hoping that wasn't going to be your answer.... but I'll have to live with whatever happens when I open the package. Still hoarding my Azo 2X3...for my best negatives.

[Ben Calwell]

Wow. 300 watt bulbs -- negs must be absolutely bullet proof.

[swmcl]

Thanks a million guys,

I'm glad I checked back.

Taking John Shiu's advice I think I'll suspend a 60W halogen edison type bulb from the ceiling (R63). I'm not really going to care much about the time so long as I've got some time. A 30 sec exposure would be good. It allows a little leeway.

I hear the negative density issue too. I sure wish there was a modern film going past D 3.0.

Thanks all.

[Jon Shiu]

I actually use the bulb in a clamp-on reflector a couple feet from the printing frame.

Jon

[murphy]

I am new to contact printing, but have looked forward to trying it for a long time. I just acquired a 8x10 so I can't put it off any longer. I have been offered several boxes of Azo & Lodima some open, a few of the Azo sealed. I want to be sure that using opened material is not a mistake. I have heard varying opinions on whether the paper loses contrast, among other issues. This is expensive stuff, any thoughts? I am wondering if it ages badly, if stored correctly. Thanks Bob

[Merg Ross]

I am new to contact printing, but have looked forward to trying it for a long time. I just acquired a 8x10 so I can't put it off any longer. I have been offered several boxes of Azo & Lodima some open, a few of the Azo sealed. I want to be sure that using opened material is not a mistake. I have heard varying opinions on whether the paper loses contrast, among other issues. This is expensive stuff, any thoughts? I am wondering if it ages badly, if stored correctly. Thanks Bob

Stored properly, Azo has a long life. Lodima is relatively new, time will tell. You might do well to contact Michael Smith at Smith/Chamlee for a definitive answer to your query and other practical advice relating to contact printing. Congratulations on the new 8x10!

[Jim Noel]

The film isn't "somewhat fogged." It is relatively fresh stock correctly stored. Michael bought a full run when he learned it was going out of production. Super XX negatives exposed and developed for contact printing have a much longer scale than do negatives for enlarging. This is true of an good negative for contact printing. Trying to print a short scaled negative p n Azo or Lodima is a waste of time and money.
Readthe info about film exposure and development on the Azo forum.

[Jim Noel]

I am new to contact printing, but have looked forward to trying it for a long time. I just acquired a 8x10 so I can't put it off any longer. I have been offered several boxes of Azo & Lodima some open, a few of the Azo sealed. I want to be sure that using opened material is not a mistake. I have heard varying opinions on whether the paper loses contrast, among other issues. This is expensive stuff, any thoughts? I am wondering if it ages badly, if stored correctly. Thanks Bob
If you are afraid of it and it is less than 60 years out of date, send it to me. I'm happy to pay the freight.

[Michael Kadillak]

Stored properly, Azo has a long life. Lodima is relatively new, time will tell. You might do well to contact Michael Smith at Smith/Chamlee for a definitive answer to your query and other practical advice relating to contact printing. Congratulations on the new 8x10!

Yes, Azo has a considerable usable shelf life. I have a box of 1951 Grade 1 Azo that prints marvelously when called upon. When Azo was laid to rest and Lodima came to life I had the opportunity to assist Michael and Paula with the promotional materials for the paper and had access to the trials and tribulations of the product via conversation. Fact of the matter is that Azo was a product that was not capable of being replicated in any way shape or form. Even if Kodak would have been willing to share the formulation (which they adamantly refused for some strange reason), the fact is that Azo was a product that was highly customized and virtually impossible to reproduce without the seasoned expertise and process with this product. As a result Lodima was born completely independent of Azo as a brand new product with a foundation of silver chloride paper and modern materials. As a result several iterations were necessary to get it tweaked to standards of performance. I read the densities on the Lodima test and Azo base prints and can attest to its luminance and have every reason to expect that Lodima will be as lasting as Azo having commonalities with a silver chloride formulation.

[Jim Shanesy]

The film isn't "somewhat fogged." It is relatively fresh stock correctly stored. Michael bought a full run when he learned it was going out of production. Super XX negatives exposed and developed for contact printing have a much longer scale than do negatives for enlarging. This is true of an good negative for contact printing. Trying to print a short scaled negative p n Azo or Lodima is a waste of time and money.
Readthe info about film exposure and development on the Azo forum.

You're right about one thing. The film isn't "somewhat fogged". It's unbelievably fogged. The base density is something like .5. Michael and Paula now make thinner negatives and just print through the fog. Super XX has such a long straight line curve that they still get a full range of tones.

[swmcl]

This discussion makes me think that one should only buy the Lodima product if they have a stash of suitable film. Otherwise, using the normally available films will only lead to grief.

If this is the case then it would be dishonest of suppliers of such a product to not make this absolutely clear to potential buyers in my view.

Unless there is another way to use the product ...

[John Bowen]

This discussion makes me think that one should only buy the Lodima product if they have a stash of suitable film. Otherwise, using the normally available films will only lead to grief.

If this is the case then it would be dishonest of suppliers of such a product to not make this absolutely clear to potential buyers in my view.

Unless there is another way to use the product ...

Tmax 400 works very well with Azo and Lodima. Check out the Azo Forum at www.michaelandpaula.com folks have used many currently available films with success.

[swmcl]

Cheers John that is reassuring.

[Bruce Barlow]

I agree with friend John. TMAX 400 is good stuff.

Properly developed, I've made Tri-X work, too, with Lodima, AZO, and PT/PD. HP5, too.

[murphy]

New to 8x10, I am looking forward to contact printing, & especially learning how to produce negatives that will be suitable for Lodima, Azo, as well as Alt. processes. I too got the impression that HP5 was a favorite because of its long straight curve. This after hours of reading here. Sure anything can work, but part of skill is information & decisions made from that. Any suggestions regarding HP5, it's unique properties regarding negs for contact printing & alt process. Also I was schooled in Zone System, that school doesn't exist, nor access to the densitometer. Would this be a wise purchase instead of the next lens?(like I need another)! Thanks

[swmcl]

When various films are being recommended we are talking about contact printing aren't we ?

I take it that no one is using Lodima for enlargement printing ?

[jnantz]

enlarging on silver chloride paper isn't really very easy to do unless you have a 5000watt enlarger bulb
http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?9618-Enlarging-on-Azo-is-now-a-reality

[swmcl]

Ohhh yeah !

What a special link ! Thanks for that.