Tried out my new Lodima

[John O'Connell]

I'm starting a new thread here for people's impressions of this stuff. I know that it will eventually devolve into a discussion of some ancillary thing (amidol, MAS, modern manufacturing) but it's worth a shot.

I printed an image on it tonight, but didn't have time to do a comparison print with my remaining Azo or step tablet prints. The image was of the boulder field at Hickory Run in PA on old 8x10 TMY, with some snow and dark shadows, so it was a good test of the scale. My first thoughts:

1. This is purely a bare bulb paper. My exposure was 49 seconds at 3 feet from a 75-watt incandescent in a reflector.

2. It's more robust than Azo, but it's somewhat easy to flake the emulsion off the edges with tongs when it's wet. This is probably still a paper to use your hands with, despite it being double-weight.

3. The image surface and quality is very Azo-like. It can definitely pass for Azo.

4. Lodima goes blue in Dektol, but doesn't turn cyanotype-blue like Azo did. It's almost an acceptable cold tone.

5. Lodima tones across a smaller range of tones than Azo in selenium. It goes neutral quickly and predictably in 1:7 at 75 degrees. It does not seem to reach the kind of lurid red you could get with Azo in selenium, or if it does, Lodima does not do so readily.

6. There is one thing I would like to see corrected in future runs. This paper has an intense curl in the box. When I cut the seal, the box started to open on its own, and I had to Scotch tape the thing shut again after getting out each sheet or test strip. A real drag in use, and I had to weigh down the box top when I put it away because I don't trust the Scotch tape.

Overall, I was pretty happy. I could definitely use this paper, depending on how MAS works out the second run production details.

[John Bowen]

Hi John...and others,

You can view my and other's 1st impressions on the Azo Forum. MAS requested we post our thoughts, questions, comments etc. there. It will probably be easier for all of us if we can post in one location rather than having some posts here, some posts on APUG and some posts on the Azo Forum.

The thread is here

http://www.michaelandpaula.com/mp/AzoForum/one.asp?ID=11604&PgNo=&GID=11604&CID=13

Thanks!

[David A. Goldfarb]

I haven't printed on it yet, but I did look in the box (under safelight of course), and noticed the curl. I put a rubber band around the box to keep it closed.

Michael said that when they do the larger run, it shouldn't curl so much, I suppose because the master roll will be larger. They'll also tweak the contrast a bit, since this batch seems to be a bit contrastier than G2 from early reports. He's been posting in the Lodima section on the Azo forum.

[ejohnson]

I posted this on APUG as well

Is there going to be any independent evaluation by someone who has a lot of black and white darkroom experience? Now all we have is Michael's testimonial and a few user reports from paying customers. I would like to see something independent oif these sources - from an experienced black and white printer who does not have a financial interest in the product or it being considered good for their own self satisfaction. I am also wondering if any recognized dealers will be carrying this paper. I am wary of scams from small private dealers selling out of their garage as there was the J and C scam and others.

Sorry to be cynical, I have watched this forum and APUG now for a couple of years and there have been too many individuals who show up, use these forums to make a big splash, and then later disappear with people's money.


Eric

[BarryS]

How are "user reports from paying customers" not independent? Isn't that the basis for an unbiased accurate report--normal users who paid for the paper out of their own pockets? I'd say most of the printers buying this paper are experienced printers that have previously used Azo papers. Within a week or two, there should be numerous reports from experienced printers--none of whom have any financial interest in the project. I bought a box of paper and one was delivered. The early accounts are positive, but like the other users, I'll be making my own assessment.

[John O'Connell]

Is there going to be any independent evaluation by someone who has a lot of black and white darkroom experience?

The only independent analysis I know of concerning Azo are those on Ed Buffaloe's site:

http://unblinkingeye.com/Articles/articles.html

(DJ was a contributor to this board at one point.)

As I lack a reflection densitometer or spectrophotometer, I cannot perform the tests required to really compare Azo and Lodima. I can do some step wedge testing, comparative printing, and can opine with some professional knowledge on a paper's color characteristics, but that's it. Furthermore, I declined to buy any Azo from the Land of Harper, so I have no capability to test the late runs of the paper. (I also develop my Azo in Dektol, so I'm not representative of the greater Azo community.)

I welcome an independent analysis, if one is forthcoming, but I doubt that MAS is acting in bad faith. When I first purchased Azo, I elected to drive to his house to pick it up. (Not recommended, btw, as it involves fording a creek with your car.) He's a nice guy, he's committed to his process, and I look forward to his success, but I want to make some more prints and learn of any unknown pitfalls before committing to more.

[ejohnson]

I am a newbie to large format, having bought my first camera about a year ago. I got an older camera with an Ektar 203mm lens. I am looking for something wider. I am also looking for a groundglass brightener and I appreciate the help I've received here.

I watched this forum for the last two years and anyone doing so would have seen the problems. I waited to join until the nastiness calmed down.

Given the problems with Jan d C, Satin snow, and the guy from Mexico selling the same equipment to multiple people and collecting money for photographs he never delivered I think my questions are legitimate.

I will continue to ask questions when I want information. So far the info about wider lenses and the brightener have been very helpful.

Eric

[pcent]

In the spirit of sharing, here are the bulk of "eric's" 14 posts on APUG


There is a very good step by step description of tray processing in the subscriber's section of the View Camera site. The process described there has a pre-soak and has the emulsion side sown.

eric johnson


I want to try one of the staining developers but am confused as to which one and where to start.I have read about PMK which seems to be the standard, there is Pyrocat and then a new one written about in the new View Camera that promises less overall stain and more image stain.


As suggested, get one of the basic large format intro books or take a look at the beginner's series with diagrams that is appearing in View Camera. Both have been a big help to me. No math, and very little complication, just good basic information.


So many of these questions about the different Zone VI models, what to consider when buying a camera, etc. hasve all been answered in View Camera. Why debate here when the answers are so easy to obtain?

It is not about what era Zone VI to buy, it is about what features you need in a camera.

It should not be nexcessary to spend 2500 on a 1st lens, or maybe even a last lens. Do some shopping, call people like MidWest Photo, Lens and Repro, etc. and ask for some advice. Get one of the book on lartge format and read through it/them.

A little homework can save a lot of thrashing here.

eric


I downloaded the article from the View Camera web site a few weeks ago. It was in the subscriber's section. Very interesting. I will be trying it this weekend.

eric


I just discovered that Camera Arts is now an online magazine. It has a lot of digital stuff but there are articles about film and traditional photography as well and some of the portfolios don't mention either film or digital so they seem to be about photography without any ideology.

www.cameraarts.com

eric


There is an excellent article called Getting Started in Large Format on the View Camera site. I am surprised more people don't make reference to this as there is a lot of good information there.

eric


A couple of years ago I downloaded the instructions on tray processing from the View Camera web site and that methods seems to work just fine. I can do from 6-10 negs at a time all for different times in the developer if I need to do so. The secret is the pre-soak and doing the sheets emulsion side down.

eric

lodima posts:


Is there going to be any independent evaluation by someone who has a lot of black and white darkroom experience? Now all we have is Michael's testimonial and a few user reports from paying customers. I would like to see something independent oif these sources. I am also wondering if any recognized dealers will be carryingf this paper. I am wary of scams from small private dealers selling out of their garage as there was the J and C scam and others.

Sorry to be cynical, but I have seen this happen too many times.

eric


So, has any paper actually been delivered yet?


What is going on? Has any of the product been delivered?

[Chuck Pere]

Why would anyone run a scam involving contact printing paper? Has to be an easier way to make a living.

[John Bowen]

Sorry to be cynical, I have watched this forum and APUG now for a couple of years and there have been too many individuals who show up, use these forums to make a big splash, and then later disappear with people's money.


Eric

Yeah, kind of like the guy that ran that Photo 3 conference. Now THERE is a guy to shy away from.

[David A. Goldfarb]

Yeah, kind of like the guy that ran that Photo 3 conference. Now THERE is a guy to shy away from.

You mean the one who ran the fake competition, collected the entry fees, and apparently didn't award all the prizes? The full list of winners and honorable mentions still has yet to be revealed. Here's the relevant discussion, for those who missed it--

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=38800

And here's the still empty list of winners, which doesn't even attempt to include the non-existent honorable mentions announced in the contest prospectus--

http://www.foto3-2008.com/httpdocs/exhibits.html

[Michael A. Smith]

I was kindly alerted to this thread by a friend.

It boggles my mind. If EJ is really Steve Simmons, then this is the lowest form of sneaky attack on me. Mr. Simmons had asked if we could supply him with a few sheets of paper to test. I told him we would do so. We just finished sending out the paper to those in the USA and overseas and have not even had a chance to open a box ourselves to send him a few sheets, which we are willing to do when we can get to it.

I had asked Mr. Simmons if he was up for an article on this new paper, and he replied in the affirmative. It was understood, I think, that the article would be by myself. I will write that article when Paula and I have had the time to do a proper evaluation of the paper and EXTENSIVE printing with it, which will happen later this winter.

As one responder said, "Those who paid money for this product, will surely provide an independent evaluation (that's a paraphrase)." They have no financial stake in it.

Thanks for the support of the large-format photographic community.

Michael A. Smith

[chris_4622]

(Just for the record, I'm also curious about Lodima, but I cannot see myself using the product in foreseeable time, as I don't currently shoot anything bigger than 5x7". :) )

All the best
//Björn


5x7 is what I use and contact printing is my method of printing. Some really nice prints can be done in this size.

[Michael Graves]

Why would anyone run a scam involving contact printing paper? Has to be an easier way to make a living.

It's easy. You spend $400,000.00 getting set up to run the first batch, that you sell to people at a loss, so they can order MUCH more from you at minimal profits.

Wait a minute. You're right. There must be an easier way. Guess I'll order some paper and see for myself how good it is and stop reading the sewage that is spewing around. Thanks, Michael and Paula. You've done a wonderful thing.

[Vaughn]

...(Just for the record, I'm also curious about Lodima, but I cannot see myself using the product in foreseeable time, as I don't currently shoot anything bigger than 5x7". :) )All the best//Björn

While I do use an 8x10, I took advantage of the savings with the few boxes of mis-cut paper and changed my order to the 7.5"x10" box of the new paper...I thought I'd use it for my 5x7's. (I don't have a 5x7 enlarger.)

I have not gotten my order yet, but no hurry...I have lots of other projects I need to work on (Platinum printing and carbon printing are on the top of the to-do list!)

Vaughn

[Andrew O'Neill]

Still waiting for mine up here in Canada. I'm sure Canada Post has it in some sorting facitlity to be moved shortly to another sorting facility...only to be moved to another...and so on. Oh well, at least it'll be kept frozen 'til it gets here.

[Michael A. Smith]

I just had to read this thread again.

Ejohnson said that he was a newbie and bought his first view camera about a year ago. Then, he stated that a couple of years ago he learned he could process 6-10 sheets of film in a tray at one time.

Am I reading improperly, or does something not compute here?

Again, thanks to all for your expressions of support. They mean more to us than you can possibly imagine.

Those of you who know me and Paula know we are fanatic about the quality of our prints and the materials we use. If anyone finds any problems with the paper, or anything you do not like about it, please let us know. There is time to correct anything that may be "off."

The paper curl: As I mentioned on the Azo Forum, which you all should participate in regarding anything with our paper, we were told about the curl. We were also told it would not be there on the large run.

The paper, also as stated in the Azo Forum, has a little too much contrast for a true grade 2. We will be doing further testing--getting the contrast lowered just a bit, so as to make proper grade separation between grade 2 and grade 3.

Paula and I do believe, based on our testing before this paper arrived, that our new Lodima Fine Art paper, to give it its full name, yields even more beautiful prints than Azo. Further work with the paper by ourselves and by many others will reveal whether that is true. If we did not believe that silver chloride paper emulsions yielded the most beautiful black and white silver gelatin prints we would not have bothered to go to all of the trouble we did to get these results. Someday the entire story of how this came about will be told. But that is for another day.

[Turner Reich]

Who care about someones comments, ignore them and talk about the paper. Is Amidol absolutely necessary, what other developers will give great results, what about dry down, how much does it curl when drying or dry, how does it dry mount, how well does it tone, what color does it tone...

[Bill_1856]

Michael, I don't know how good your paper is, but you and Paula are The Tops!

[John Bowen]

Who care about someones comments, ignore them and talk about the paper. Is Amidol absolutely necessary, what other developers will give great results, what about dry down, how much does it curl when drying or dry, how does it dry mount, how well does it tone, what color does it tone...

Check the Azo Forum for answers to many of these questions

[Caroline Matthews]

[Steve Simmons (aka Eric) because he had absolutely nothing to do with it its success and desperately wants the LF world to go through him. The sad fact is the LF community has left him behind and is moving on down the road. Hell of an attitude for someone that has 25 years into the business.[/QUOTE]


Yes, and in my opinion, the magazine has declined as well. It used to be that Thalmann, Harris, and others contributed useful, informative, and well-written articles, but now we have repetitive articles on the same subjects (at least three Scheimpflug articles in the last year, for example), poorly done and poorly presented articles on photographers' work, and a lot of filler ("Steve Simmons has undertaken the 7x17 camera" even though there has been very little of use in his writings). It's too bad there isn't another alternative for large format photographers. I'm so glad this forum exists.

[Michael Jones]

I am a newbie to large format...

I watched this forum ...



Please continue to watch, but please be careful with your comments. I suggest you continue to read and research who these people posting are before you post. So far the people posting here are the ones who have spent their time (years) and their money (no offense, but more money than the cost of your lens on just this batch of test paper) on this project. Please sit back and continue to learn.

Mike

[Michael Jones]

BTW, my boxes arrived in Tennessee yesterday. Merry Christmas to me.

Mike

[jdc]

It is too bad that M and C can't bask in the deserving glow generated by their good works due to the idiocy of one Bozo.

Good on ya M & C!


It would be nice if the next project were to be a proper, professional magazine dedicated to large format.

[Bjorn Nilsson]

...
But, given the previous posts of "Eric" as compiled by "pcent", what is it that makes you guys jump at him? I guess that you see a pattern which matches Mr Simmons in his various disguises, but I'm not familiar with that particular pattern.
Feel free to (sparingly) PM and enlighten me. I'm just curious.

(Just for the record, I'm also curious about Lodima, but I cannot see myself using the product in foreseeable time, as I don't currently shoot anything bigger than 5x7". :) )

All the best
//Björn


Ehh, I must have been a bit tired last night. But finally, I do see the pattern. :o

Btw, I recon that the next run is somewhere in the future so I will try a box along with some Amidol from Artcraft.

//Björn

[evan clarke]

Check the Azo Forum for answers to many of these questions

There must be a new Lodima Forum!!:) I got mine in Wisconsin and will play on Saturday. I have many 8x10 negs waiting..Evan Clarke

[Bruce Barlow]

Responding to a coupla things.

First, I hope all you guys are positive that ejohnson is actually Mr. Simmons, if not, this is sad. And many know that I have no compulsion to defend Mr. Simmons.

I wrote an article about Azo that never got published in View Camera, and posted it for free download from my web site, www.circleofthesunproductions.com Feel free to take a look. It's an old article, but so is the paper, and nothing has changed, including my opinions about Azo.

As far as a good review, John Bowen has evolved into one of the better photographers I know. He's a fine printer with a keen eye. If he says it's good, it is. Trust me on this one. I don't know if Peter Schrager is weighing in with Lodima, but there's another source to trust. Those are two of many who inhabit this forum from time to time, but they're two whose work I've seen and therefore, whose opinions I trust categorically.

No offense, Michael (one of my favorite folks in photography...next to his wife), but you're better off having someone else write the first View Camera article - you clearly have a vested interest that many on the fence might not fancy. Another author extolling Lodima's virtues would serve you better, and sell more paper (which we all want, by the way). Maybe write your own soon after, maybe oriented towards a "master class" for getting the most out if Lodima, but consider leaving "first impressions" to someone else.

Next, I bought the 7.5 by 10 just so I can make 5x7 contacts. For me, it's a magical size, and Azo 5x7s are tasty. Based on what Mr. Bowen tells me, Lodima will be as tasty, or more.

Last, it's snowing here in the northeast again, so I'm afraid that UPS may fail to deliver my Lodima one more time. It's gotta come tomorrow, 6-10 more white inches due Friday. Welcome to New Hampshire. Our president declared us a disaster area while the shoes were flying...

[Don Hutton]

No offense, Michael (one of my favorite folks in photography...next to his wife), but you're better off having someone else write the first View Camera article - you clearly have a vested interest that many on the fence might not fancy. Another author extolling Lodima's virtues would serve you better, and sell more paper (which we all want, by the way). Maybe write your own soon after, maybe oriented towards a "master class" for getting the most out if Lodima, but consider leaving "first impressions" to someone else.Bruce

I have no axe to grind on this at all, and completely see your point. However, I find it a little odd that, given your views stated above, you wrote a review for your "business partner, friend and fan"'s new 8x10 camera in View Camera magazine. I honestly don't really see any difference to Michael writing an article on Lodima - like yourself and Richard's camera, he probably knows more about Lodima and Azo than anyone else...?

Given Steve's most recent behaviour, perhaps articles in View Camera magazine will be a moot point down the line anyway....

[MIke Sherck]

There must be a new Lodima Forum!!:) I got mine in Wisconsin and will play on Saturday. I have many 8x10 negs waiting..Evan Clarke

Evan, if you are going to the LF Asylum print show in January, please bring a few along. I missed out on getting a box and would love to see what the paper looks like.

Mike

[John Bowen]

There must be a new Lodima Forum!!:) I got mine in Wisconsin and will play on Saturday. I have many 8x10 negs waiting..Evan Clarke

Evan,

There is a a Lodima Section on the Azo Forum...

[Bruce Barlow]

Quote: "I have no axe to grind on this at all, and completely see your point. However, I find it a little odd that, given your views stated above, you wrote a review for your "business partner, friend and fan"'s new 8x10 camera in View Camera magazine. I honestly don't really see any difference to Michael writing an article on Lodima - like yourself and Richard's camera, he probably knows more about Lodima and Azo than anyone else...?"


I fail to see what's odd, and I hear the grindstone turning despite your innocent assertions to the contrary. Michael sells the paper and has a direct stake and financial interest. I have no financial stake in Richard's camera. We teach workshops and make videos together. It is entirely appropriate for me to help a friend, and if you had actually read the article instead of bloviating at me, you would see that I owned up to my friendship with him at the beginning, admitting that I am heavily biased.

In addition, at the time I was the only one in the known universe who had one of Richard's 8x10s, including him. Simmons asked me to write a review. I told him that I felt uncomfortable with a review, which would imply potential criticisms, but rather would write a "first impressions" piece, which I did feel comfortable writing.. That's what I wrote, and any characterization of it as a review comes from others, not me.

Simmons then went off at me (it was the time of the Photo 3 meltdown, and I had the audacity to defend my other good friend Ted Harris), and to make a long story short, I think I'm the only author on the planet ever to get paid for an article in View Camers before it was published!

To not see the difference is, frankly, pretty stunning to me. And I think you can tell I'm irritated. But I'm grumpy today, so Don, I apologize for my grumpiness, but the words stand.

At least we agree, I think, that an initial review by someone else might just sell more paper, which was my point. I'd love to see an article by Michael on fine-tuning, but only after he's rolling in dough from paper sales. Go M and P!

[SAShruby]

It's easy. You spend $400,000.00 getting set up to run the first batch, that you sell to people at a loss, so they can order MUCH more from you at minimal profits.

Wait a minute. You're right. There must be an easier way. Guess I'll order some paper and see for myself how good it is and stop reading the sewage that is spewing around. Thanks, Michael and Paula. You've done a wonderful thing.

Naah, Eric thinks Michael and Paula are another Madoff pyramid scheme. ;).

[evan clarke]

Evan, if you are going to the LF Asylum print show in January, please bring a few along. I missed out on getting a box and would love to see what the paper looks like.

Mike

I will, I am going to print Saturday and will soup in 130 and Amidol for a comparison..See you in January!!..Evan

[evan clarke]

Evan,

There is a a Lodima Section on the Azo Forum...

Thanks...Evan

[Michael A. Smith]

Need Help:

This is a "dog ate my homework" story.

I just received this email:

"The paper arrived at my farm. The problem is, my dog got to the package before we did and exposed all 100 sheets to the elements, not a pretty sight for the first acquisition for my new dark room! When can I order more paper (which I think I will have you ship to a neighbor's, where my dog can't get to it) ?"

Unfortunately, we have no more paper available.

Is there anyone who does not think they will want to use all of their paper and who can send part of it to the fellow with the uncontrollable dog. Is so, let us know and we will give you proper contact information paper. Financial arrangements can be made directly through the person needing the paper.

Many thanks.

Michael A. Smith

[David Karp]

First time I have heard that story where the dog eating something served to detriment the "victim." :)

[David A. Goldfarb]

The dog must have been really excited about getting his new Lodima Fine Art paper. Mine came in a cardboard box, and the paper was in an opaque bag in a box sealed with four pieces of tape. Maybe the dog can smell the gelatin and thinks there's a good beef bone in there.

[Doug Howk]

Obviously, its lawsuit time since the packaging was inadequate to protect against a dog ;-)
Even with my limited testing, I was surprised how fast the paper reacted to developer. I've used both Ansco PF-130 and Agfa Neutol WA, and have resorted to water bath for higher contrast negs. In these developers, the paper image is nice warm tone.

[Turner Reich]

Has anyone not received their paper yet?

[Andrew O'Neill]

I got mine on Saturday (kept it far away from my dog). Played around with it a bit this morning. I've got a lot to learn about using a real contact printing paper, having been "spoilt" on VC paper.

[Pete Watkins]

Michael,
Your client needs to buy a greyhound, they're too idle to do anything! His post would be safe.
Best wishes,
Pete.

[SAShruby]

Paper arrived in Canada, So international orders are underway.

[tim o'brien]

Has anyone not received their paper yet?


Mine being the last box shipped (thank you Michael), I just got mine an hour ago. I would suspect everyone's in the US of A should have gotten theirs. This weekend might be fun (or frustrating, we will see). I feel like it's Christmas or sumthin'. Wait.. it IS Christmas!

I plan on using PF 130, some very nice 8x10 and 5x7 negatives to contact, and we will experiment with Selenium toning. I'll let you know.

tim in san jose

[Richard K.]

Paper arrived in Canada, So international orders are underway.

Got mine yesterday in Toronto. Peter, every time I try to log on to your web site, I can't!

[keeds]

Well, I've given it a quick go in some Neutol WA. Don't have any Amidol. Some comments from me (for what they are worth)...

Very curly out of box. Not really a problem with a proper split back frame.
15 secs under a 200Watt lamp about 3 feet above frame.
Comes up very fast in Neutol WA 1:14
Dries flat with a little help from some weight.

My initial reactions are great blacks and lovely white base. I like it.

Well I think this paper will finally give me the impetus to do some proper testing for film speed and development times. Up till now I've been a ball park kind of guy and relied on VC paper or Lith to get me out of trouble. This paper looks like a winner to me.

[Sal Santamaura]

I finally printed on Lodima FA test paper. Circumstances of life here severely limit my time available for photography or darkroom work. Therefore, although I have lots of Amidol on hand from Greg Davis’ group purchase, the convenience of Neutol WA (1:7) and TF4 (1:3) liquid concentrates wins out. I used that combination on the Lodima with a one minute developing time.

My negatives are not developed with a staining developer. I expose Canadian grade 2 Azo using a 38W bulb in a 10-inch Smith Victor reflector with clip-on diffuser. At the same 15-inch illuminant distance, Lodima FA required that I use a 60W bulb to stay in the same 17 – 20 second exposure range. Emergence time was 5 seconds, compared to 18 seconds for Canadian grade 2 Azo (the Azo gets 3 minutes in Neutol WA).

In Neutol WA, this paper is warm! Canadian grade 2 Azo is a cold neutral in the same developer; I tone it for 3 minutes in Ilford HARMAN selenium toner 1:10 to solidify blacks and achieve the slightest hint of warmth. By contrast, Lodima FA has the same patent leather blacks and is almost brown right out of the developer. No need to tone Lodima.

Curl. Yeah, it sure does curl. In fact, while Lodima prints I made from 5x7 negatives were sharp, those from 6-1/2 x 8-1/2 negatives on 8x10 paper had areas of unsharpness. I attribute this to the weak springs on my larger printing frame being unable to hold the sandwich flat against the curl. I suspect a vacuum frame would overcome that problem but hope the manufacturer’s assurances to Michael and Paula that production runs won’t curl are lived up to.

I experienced almost none of the edge lifting reported by others when printing 5x7 and a little when using full 8x10 sheets. I suspect the problem was made worse by additional handling necessitated by curl with the larger paper.

[timbo10ca]

I guess it's time to share my experience- this stuff is GREAT! I found mixing the amidol no problem (even fun- chemistry class all over again!), but the filtering was tedious (I have the Chinese stuff). Worth it though! Once I got going with the printing (which ended up being a 10 hour session), I felt quite liberated from the confines of my regular printing workflow of careful temperature control of developer (never deviating from 68F), split contrast printing, f/stop timers, etc etc. I don't know how, but I got lucky with how I set everything up. I put a 300 watt bulb in, about 3 feet or so from the printing frame and was getting nice long, workable exposures to allow dodging (about 60-70 sec). The developer was used at room temp (about 65F) and never checked again all day.

I did 3 negatives- I used the metronome and outflanking techniques and I must say, I'm pleasantly surprised with how successful I was. 3 negs to my level of "fine art" competance in 1 day with a completely new system, developer and paper is pretty impressive. I must say though, I could have done 5 negs I'm sure, if it wasn't for that damnable curl to the paper...... It made centering the 5x7 neg on the full paper quite difficult. I eventually got a system were I averaged 8-10 minutes a print, but without perfect centering- close enough for matting though. I just used 2 hands in the developer, so the curl was not an issue there. The black floaties were there in the fix and wash, but were no problem to remove. As I was printing 5x7 negs on the 8x10 paper, the edge damage doesn't bother me, but I don't think I'd appreciate it if I had 8x10 negs. It took *a lot* of washing, fixing, and more washing to get all of the amidol yellow out of the paper though.

I definitely agree that this is a grade 3 paper. I started the session with my standard /reference "N" neg that prints nicely on grade 2 Ilford MGIV and with Ziatype. It ended up needing 10sec amidol and 50sec water bath. That was a bit of guess-work, having never done a water bath before! Having the developer a little cooler probably helped too. I definitely cannot see *anything* going on in that dark cherry developer to know when to pull it for the water bath! I just tried 30sec/30sec then 15/45 and decided 10/50 would probably be the best I'd get and went for it. Still lost some shadow detail in areas that went straight to black, but generally, I like the outcome- it compares very closely to my best version of this neg when printed to a higher contrast (grade 3) to add some punch on MGIV. The only thing I wasn't fond of was that it took on a bit of a greenish cast, even compared to the 30/30 print. This seemed to straighten out somewhat after Selenium toning and drying. A grade 2 or even 2 1/2 would probably have look better though. The next 2 negs seem to print nicest on grade 3 MGIV with the aid of some dodging. They turned out bang- on. I have yet to try some negs that print straight at grade 3- I have some nice ones that will be a good final test of this paper's "true grade" in my hands.

If this is an equivalent to AZO (which I've never used), I can't for the life of me understand why there are so many recommendations to developer AZO negs to a higher contrast- if anything I needed an "N-1" neg for this paper, making this "N" neg appropriate for a Grade 2 Lodima. An "N+1" neg would not print on this current stuff at all well.... Maybe I'm missing something- much more experienced people than I are saying "higher contrast negs are the way to go for AZO". I'm glad this is not the case for me with Lodima- once the true grade 2 comes out, I will be able to use the same neg for MGIV, Ziatype and Lodima- very convenient and less $.

Overall, I definitley give this paper 2 thumbs up, and hope to see a grade 2 introduced as well (but not lose this grade 3, as I do often print at grade 3). I'm not sure if it outperforms MGIV FB in all instances, but I find it's warmer color to be pleasing and it seems to give me better mid-tone seperation and detail, more glowing highlights, and maybe even more apparent sharpness. The loss of shadow detail is probably do to its higher grade, and I imagine the true grade 2 would solve this for me. When that happens, I'll be hard- pressed to think of a reason to contact print on MGIV, unless it's a negative that really needs split- filter printing and can't be salvaged in water bath.

Interesting note (I think so, anyway): the last 2 negs I worked with that print at grade 3 haven't been touched for over a year, and when I compared the prints side by side, I printed them to the identical exposure and contrast- I came to the exact same printing decisions and results with a completely new system after having not printed the originals for many months. I wonder what that means..... Either I've looked at the prints alot over the last year, I have a very certain vision in my mind for these 2 negs, or I may actually finally know what I'm doing ( a little bit ;-P)!

Tim

[Chauncey Walden]

Finally broke open my pack. Very contrasty. Exposure ranged from 7 seconds to 8 minutes (is this a reciprocity failure thing?) with a 60 watt bulb in a metal reflector at 3.5 feet. (Definitely got to tame those negs.) Once submerged, 60 seconds in 130 was enough. Nice look. Only complaint was the little chips that came out of the emulsion - not at the edges.