7 Stops

[Tin Can]

Ilford FB Glossy

most new DIGI exceeds

[Drew Wiley]

Since when is "DIGI" a paper? Are you referring to ink printers, or inkjet? Some kind of Dmax to Dmin capacity, or what? And exactly which Ilford FB glossy - they certainly differ from one another in that respect. A paper like Classic FB simply can't achieve the DMax and overall brilliance of something like MGWT. And if you account for final toning, it's pretty darn hard to "exceed" that. Printing monochrome with actual classic dye transfer dyes could achieve greater black gradation and DMax than silver papers, but at the expense of highlight gradation. Modern programmed ink printers are similar in that way. Then there is the permance issue. Tonality-wise, Inkjet can be stinkjet unless the inks are customized for chromogenic work only. The gray and blacks in the polychrome sets don't even have decently matching sheen levels - it's an infamous Achilles heel of those ink sets. You should know better than to make blanket generic statements.

This isn't ancient Greece, with representatives of Sparta commanded to respond in the shortest possible phrasing. Spell out what you mean. As far as I'm concerned, "Most digi recedes." Do I need another six stomps to add up to seven? The full luminance range of a print is largely determined by the nature of the paper surface itself. Going "Digi" won't change that. The presence of relatively opaque inks actually suppresses it to an extent.

[Michael R]

Darkroom prints and inkjet prints have more or less the same potential reflection density range and nothing has changed much since the advent of paper. The print will always be the limiting part of the process regardless of how the image is initially recorded. Most general purpose B&W and C-41 films can record at least 12 “stops”. Digital can probably do that - maybe less, maybe more. Either way there is a ton of compression in the transitions from scene to a reflective medium.


Since when is "DIGI" a paper? Are you referring to ink printers, or inkjet? Some kind of Dmax to Dmin capacity, or what? And exactly which Ilford FB glossy - they certainly differ from one another in that respect. A paper like Classic FB simply can't achieve the DMax and overall brilliance of something like MGWT. And if you account for final toning, it's pretty darn hard to "exceed" that. Printing monochrome with actual classic dye transfer dyes could achieve greater black gradation and DMax than silver papers, but at the expense of highlight gradation. Modern programmed ink printers are similar in that way. Then there is the permance issue. Tonality-wise, Inkjet can be stinkjet unless the inks are customized for chromogenic work only. The gray and blacks in the polychrome sets don't even have decently matching sheen levels - it's an infamous Achilles heel of those ink sets. You should know better than to make blanket generic statements.

This isn't ancient Greece, with representatives of Sparta commanded to respond in the shortest possible phrasing. Spell out what you mean. As far as I'm concerned, "Most digi recedes." Do I need another six stomps to add up to seven? The full luminance range of a print is largely determined by the nature of the paper surface itself. Going "Digi" won't change that. The presence of relatively opaque inks actually suppresses it to an extent.

[Drew Wiley]

Even the term, "glossy" is relative. But at least it's not the same as the texture of a burlap bag. But I take exception that C41 films can "record" at least 12 stops or range like some b&w films can. Just the presence of something detectable way out in the nether regions of the Kuiper Belt doesn't equate to actual color reproduction or hue faithfulness. It's not neutral like a black and white film gray scale; so just how much of that overage in generally amateurish C41 films is really useful anyway?

[BrianShaw]

…

This isn't ancient Greece, with representatives of Sparta commanded to respond in the shortest possible phrasing. Spell out what you mean. As far as I'm concerned, "Most digi recedes." Do I need another six stomps to add up to seven? The full luminance range of a print is largely determined by the nature of the paper surface itself. Going "Digi" won't change that. The presence of relatively opaque inks actually suppresses it to an extent.

Oh?

[Drew Wiley]

Did I step on someone's toes? - potentially painful "digits"?

[Michael R]

Even the term, "glossy" is relative. But at least it's not the same as the texture of a burlap bag. But I take exception that C41 films can "record" at least 12 stops or range like some b&w films can. Just the presence of something detectable way out in the nether regions of the Kuiper Belt doesn't equate to actual color reproduction or hue faithfulness. It's not neutral like a black and white film gray scale; so just how much of that overage in generally amateurish C41 films is really useful anyway?

Well, for example the Portra films, in particular Portra 400 have very long exposure scales. If you look at the characteristic curves the colour reproduction looks to be pretty constant.

[Drew Wiley]

I don't happen to subscribe to that ole 70's fad look of week old dishwater. Yes, it could be interesting, and still sometimes is, but relied on the crossover characteristics way out in the Kuiper Belt inherent to wide latitude portrait films, which can hardly be called accurate hue renderings or scene reproduction way out there. People can do anything they want for creative reasons, but that's a separate issue. Traditional color neg films, especially amateur ones like Kodacolor Gold, were engineered to give "pleasing skintones" at the expense of pretty much everything else. The darn dye curves overlap to quite an extent.

I know quite well what Porta 400 can do and can't do, and actually preferred 160VC. But the obvious Anti-traditional CN film is Ektar, which has far more cleanly separated dye curves up to a certain point, and then they overlap in almost the completely opposite manner than portrait films. But at least hues in general come out way cleaner or purer than the traditional muddy dishwater look. Of course, Portra 160 is reasonably balanced if the scene contrast range isn't overtly exploited; but it's saturation is weak. Digital saturation enhancement might simulate something else, but can never be quite the same. This is in fact all about the curves. Very clean hue separation in an overall way is dependent to a considerable extent on the steepness of the curves. That's why accurate color balance is easier to achieve on a chrome film, yet with a serious side effect of luminance range limitation. So it all depends on your priorities and subject matter. Different strokes for different folks.

People can forum argue all they want; but I know how to actually get extremely clean saturated hues out of color neg film directly onto RA4 paper that most people would find indistinguishable from the finest chrome print results. Big difference.

[jnantz]

Oh?

these anti digital rants never change .. it's not worth the typing.

[bmikiten]

You are probably not acquainted with Tin Can. He tends to post things like this just to elicit movement and response in the group. Many of the posts are vague and opinionated. I get the sense that he'd be a great person to have lunch with and discuss the world of photography.

[Drew Wiley]

Has nothing to do with "anti digital rants", which certain people endless rant about themselves. I'm just playing ping pong with Tin Can, plus the "Oh? in a different post. So my response wasn't directed against "digi" at all, but the notion that CN films have realistically usable 12 stop ranges in any serious qualitative sense. They don't.

[jnantz]

You are probably not acquainted with Tin Can.

yes I am acquainted with him.

Has nothing to do with "anti digital rants", which certain people endless rant about themselves. I'm just playing ping pong with Tin Can, plus the "Oh? in a different post. So my response wasn't directed against "digi" at all, but the notion that CN films have realistically usable 12 stop ranges in any serious qualitative sense. They don't.

as I said not even worth typing

[Willie]

7 stops? Thought this was about the TinMan taking a Bus Trip.

[BrianShaw]

Has nothing to do with "anti digital rants", which certain people endless rant about themselves. I'm just playing ping pong with Tin Can, plus the "Oh? in a different post. So my response wasn't directed against "digi" at all, but the notion that CN films have realistically usable 12 stop ranges in any serious qualitative sense. They don't.

I was mostly being terse with words… poking at your comment on terseness. :)

[Drew Wiley]

It's not wise for any tin man to take a bus trip. There's a risk of getting recycled into a side panel or something like that. Then if someone steals your watch, you'll go into cardiac arrest.

[jnantz]

It's not wise for any tin man to take a bus trip. There's a risk of getting recycled into a side panel or something like that. Then if someone steals your watch, you'll go into cardiac arrest.

I thought it was because without the proper lubricant you'd be dropped off on the side of the road for not paying your bus fare (on your 7stop search for Nimmie Ames ) and have to wait endlessly for some wannabe extra from GLEE to show up with her dog to oil you up.. then when you eventually find her she's shacked up with Chopfyt, some guy she hooked up with on Tinder.

[John Layton]

seven stops...(memory machine reluctantly turning over)...old reference to transparency film? Hmmm....

[BrianShaw]

… but, as usual, the reference was completely opaque.

[John Layton]

Well...at least I'm searching for a bit of objectivity amidst, it would seem, an otherwise infinite sea of emulsions! :rolleyes:

[Tin Can]

This 100-sheet pack of 11 x 14" Multigrade FB Classic Variable Contrast Paper from Ilford is a baryta-coated fiber base paper with a glossy finish designed for traditional black & white photo printing. This paper features a double weight of 255 gsm and a white base tint providing neutral colors. Additionally, it is variable contrast paper with seven full grades of contrast available. These grades are accessible with the use of speed-matched filters.

[BrianShaw]

Oh.

[Vaughn]

Oh, grades, not stops...

Does that mean if they made a filter set of 10 MC filters instead of 7, their papers would have 10 full grades of contrast?

Edit late to add: sarcasm alert

[Drew Wiley]

Whatever. Even the spacing of grades differed brand to brand; there never has been a constant densitometric definition of these grades. And the whole topic makes even less sense today, since actual graded papers are becoming scarcer than Ivory Billed Woodpeckers. The respective paper curves give a more accurate impression. Simple experimentation with test strip tells you even more.

Since nearly all papers are VC today instead, and many use colorheads or analogous devices to expose these, it all a sliding scale of density continuum anyway. VC sheet filters are pretty much a holdover from the Jurassic era, just like grade classifications themselves.

Anyway, MG Classic is somewhat of a compromise product, superior in scale and density to MG IV, but certainly not Ilford's finest offering. I drymounted a few nice prints from it recently, but it's hardly the punchiest paper out there. And by them allegedly calling it a "7 grade product" - well, that again is a very elastic marketing ploy with the rubber band stretched well past the breaking point in my opinion. Take it with a grain of salt.

[John Layton]

Oh.

[Michael R]

Haha that depends on what “full” means. What if you have 10 filters numbered 0.1, 0.2...? I guess that’s only one full grade :)

Anyhow... the “contrast” or grade (contrast in quotes because technically the contrast - ie density range of a paper is a constant) is the log exposure range or LER. The narrowest range you can get is the paper’s maximum “contrast”. The widest range you can get is the paper’s minimum “contrast”. There is an ISO standard for determining and labelling LER. What you call the LER in terms of grade is somewhat arbitrary. For example as Drew alluded to, a range of ISO R95 is Ivory Billed Woodpecker, but you would not be incorrect if you decided instead to call it grade 2 or medium or something else.


Oh, grades, not stops...

Does that mean if they made a filter set of 10 MC filters instead of 7, their papers would have 10 full grades of contrast?

[Vaughn]

Thanks, Michael. That is what I thought, and of course marketing writes the wording on the packages, not the technicians/engineers. :cool:

[djdister]

It's not 7 stops. According to Ilford's website, the paper offers contrast grades in "half grade increments from 00 to 5"