8x10 contact printing in Fomatone Classic?

[Rui Morais de Sousa]

Hi,
I'm looking for the opinion of somebody with experience in contactprinting 8x10 Fomapan 100 (normal contrast) in Fomatone Baryt paper (multigrade).
Can I expect good results? What kind of paper developer would you advise for this combo?
I intend to use the light source of my Zone VI enlarger, so that I can have different grades in the same sheet of paper.
Until now, I have done it with Ilford Multigrade IV FB, but couldn't really get excited about it...
Other suggestions?
Thank you very much in advance.
Rui

[ret wisner]

its way slower than 100asa so i would expose at 50asa and develop at about 5-6 min in d76 1-1,

[Scott Whitford]

Foma 100 film and MG131 paper is a beautiful combination for contact printing.

For a paper developer I normally use Ansco130 or D-55. After the second fix I give it a quick dunk in 1+20 KRST - just enough to shift the slightly greenish cast to brown/black.

Scott

[keeds]

The fomatone papers are great for lithing. I've done a number of 8x10 contact lith prints with the foma 100 and fomatone. Loved the results...

[Rui Morais de Sousa]

Thanks for the trouble of answering.
a)ret wisner: I am afraid that you didn't understand my question. I have already the negatives photographed and developed! Like you have suggested in D-76 1+1 or Rodinal 1+50 (I think some also in Adox Adolux 1+1 or 1+3, if I remember well). In retrospect I think that my formulation of the question must have misled you: when I said normal contrast, I didn't mean that I wanted it; I meant that the negatives I have ARE normal contrast, for normal silverprinting (and not for platinum, or whatever needing more contrast...).
b)Scott, Thank you for assuring me that Fomapan 100 and Fomatone MG131 make a good combination. That makes me more confident of ordering some from Fotoimpex in Germany. Sadly, I can't try the developers that you suggest, as I think that I can't find them over here in Europe (where I live, surely not! The only tripod that I have seen here in some years, was mine...). By the way, and sorry if I sound Kulturbanause here: what is KRST? A toner? Something like Selenium or Agfa Viradon? I may be stupid at the moment, but I don't recall hearing or reading about it...
c) keeds: as far as I can understand what you mean by lithing, it is not what I am looking for at the moment (although I saw yesterday night some interesting topics about it in the site of Wolfgang Moersh, from Germany). I am wishing for a "natural" rendition of my subjects, with a long tonal scale as possible, with detailed shadows and, most of all, detailed highlights (it seems that I tend to overdevelope my negatives, would love to better control my tonal separation in the highlights).
Fasit: maybe I am looking for a "miracle", but they do exist, or am I wrong? At least if I look at some prints by some masters that I admire... It is there that I am trying to aim...

[David Karp]

KRST = Kodak Rapid Selenium Toner

[Rui Morais de Sousa]

Thanks David,
I really should have known (I forgot about the Rapid...)

[Christopher Nisperos]

Scott, Thank you for assuring me that Fomapan 100 and Fomatone MG131 make a good combination. That makes me more confident of ordering some from Fotoimpex in Germany. Sadly, I can't try the developers that you suggest, as I think that I can't find them over here in Europe (where I live, surely not! The only tripod that I have seen here in some years, was mine...).

Hi Rui,

The developers mentioned by Scott are not "off the shelf" products, but developers that you can mix, yourself.

The formulas are available online, and the raw chemicals are available from several mail-order sources (Photographer's Supply, Digital Truth, Tech Chem, etc., in the U.S.). If you feel more comfortable buying your chemicals here in Europe (I live in Paris) try Silver Print or Retrophotographic --both, in the U.K.-- or Prophot, here in France.

Best,

Chris

[Don Dudenbostel]

Fomatone with LPD or dektol is a good place to start. Yes you can produce excellent prints but it all starts with properly exposed and processed negatives. My negs would be considered contrasty by many but I've been shooting, processing and printing for over fifty years and this is how I best achieve the type of print I like and my prints have beautiful full tones. It doesn't hurt to test a variety of papers and developers. I generally print on Ilford MG FB Warmtone glossy but have used a variety of papers since the 50's including Ansco, Dupont, Kodak, Forte, Agfa and others that no longer are made. Rarely have I switched by choice. For many years Dektol and Selectol soft were my standards with some Ektaflo, Ektanol ans Selectol for specific papers. A few years back when I switched to Ilford WT I had a problem with a green cast and switched to LPD and now use exclusively LPD.

[Rui Morais de Sousa]

Thanks Christopher and Don for your answers,
I must say that I didn't think about the possibility of the developers mentioned by Scott as beeing home-made...
I have in the meantime received some Fomatone and Adotol Konstant + Fomatol PW as paper developers. I still must have some Dektol (my standard developer) and (old) Bromophen in stock. So, I will be trying something soon. The contact prints that I have tryed in Multigrade FB didn't satisfy me completely. Maybe I am just not in form...
Don, I also prefer dense negatives and I also believe that most people would consider them contrasty... But I find them better to print with a VC cold light.
Yes, papers (and films) come and go, and I am afraid that we will have to get used that they go more than they come...
Cheers,
Rui
AL-MOST-LY PHOTOGRAPHY (http://ruimoraisdesousa.blogspot.com/)

[ic-racer]

Contact printing results with that combo should not be any different than projection printing with a diffuse source.

When using the enlarger as a light source, dust can show up well on either side of the glass and on top of the negative. I used to use a 'bunny suit' when doing that.

I see you like dense negatives. That is good, the longer exposures can help minimize any dust shadows when using the enlarger light source.

[Rui Morais de Sousa]

[QUOTE=ic-racer;608237] I used to use a 'bunny suit' when doing that.
Thanks for the answer, but now you've got me curious...
Can you please explain what you mean with "bunny suit"? (Maybe something to remove dust looking like the girls from playboy or the bugs bunny?).
Can't remember hearing that expression...
Rui
P.S.: Yes, I do use the enlarger as a light source, and try to take advantage of it's vario-contrast capabilities.