Ulophot
22-Jun-2019, 16:48
Ilford Multigrade Warmtone fiber, in gloss and, increasingly, semi-matte (the more recent gloss surface is too glossy for my taste) has been my primary paper since it came out, following the demise of Portriga, Insignia, and some other warm papers. I have used Multigrade developer or Dektol, and selenium toner, typically 1:19. Today, I tested Bergger's VC warm-tone semi-matte fiber and Ilford-Harman's warmtone developer. By no means a thorough exploration, it gave a starting guide. This is how I tested.
I used a half-length full-range portrait negative, 4x5, made in direct sunlight. I made 8 identical 5x7 prints on Ilford (WTF), 8 on Bergger (BG). I developed 4 of each in Dektol (D) and 4 in warmtone (W) developer. I then toned 3 sets of 4 prints (WTF in both D and W; ditto BG) for 5, 7, and 10 minutes, leaving one set untoned.
Preliminary observations: The two papers are identical or almost so in weight and surface. BG's base is slightly whiter, but a very subtle difference even in side-by-side comparison. BG also requires about 17% more exposure in my system with a grade 2 filter (see footnote) and seems to be just a tad softer, with a more gentle shoulder, but I did not test for this directly.
The untoned prints in each set are virtually identical, with a slight nod to warmth going to WTF. Both are warm, the WTF tends a bit more toward the golden. The W developer appeared to make no difference in color, but seemed to be a bit more active than the D, lowering the darker values a bit -- but again, a subtlety. In the toned sets, WTF toned somewhat more than BG for each time interval, with the color shift tending to affect the upper mid values more than it did in the BG. The tone of the color shift tracked with the untoned color difference, i.e., the BG is a bit more towards the neutral paper's purplish selenium color while the WTF is a bit more towards the brown.
In any case, both are fine warm tone papers, and their similarities are certainly greater than their differences.
-----------
Footnote: Although I used to keep a 40Y in my coldlight enlarging light path, I decided, after a few tests, to forego it when I returned to my darkroom a few years ago, after about 13 years' absence. It may well have faded after my previous heavy use as a professional (and sitting so long), and I was unable to find a 6"-square replacement without buying a full set of CC filters. I have tweaked my processes to print without it and so far have encountered no significant problem.
I used a half-length full-range portrait negative, 4x5, made in direct sunlight. I made 8 identical 5x7 prints on Ilford (WTF), 8 on Bergger (BG). I developed 4 of each in Dektol (D) and 4 in warmtone (W) developer. I then toned 3 sets of 4 prints (WTF in both D and W; ditto BG) for 5, 7, and 10 minutes, leaving one set untoned.
Preliminary observations: The two papers are identical or almost so in weight and surface. BG's base is slightly whiter, but a very subtle difference even in side-by-side comparison. BG also requires about 17% more exposure in my system with a grade 2 filter (see footnote) and seems to be just a tad softer, with a more gentle shoulder, but I did not test for this directly.
The untoned prints in each set are virtually identical, with a slight nod to warmth going to WTF. Both are warm, the WTF tends a bit more toward the golden. The W developer appeared to make no difference in color, but seemed to be a bit more active than the D, lowering the darker values a bit -- but again, a subtlety. In the toned sets, WTF toned somewhat more than BG for each time interval, with the color shift tending to affect the upper mid values more than it did in the BG. The tone of the color shift tracked with the untoned color difference, i.e., the BG is a bit more towards the neutral paper's purplish selenium color while the WTF is a bit more towards the brown.
In any case, both are fine warm tone papers, and their similarities are certainly greater than their differences.
-----------
Footnote: Although I used to keep a 40Y in my coldlight enlarging light path, I decided, after a few tests, to forego it when I returned to my darkroom a few years ago, after about 13 years' absence. It may well have faded after my previous heavy use as a professional (and sitting so long), and I was unable to find a 6"-square replacement without buying a full set of CC filters. I have tweaked my processes to print without it and so far have encountered no significant problem.