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/Az...D=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

[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.

[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.in...ad.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

[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.

[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

[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