I have not used polymax and Kodak do not seem to give combined Y+M filtration figures in their data sheets so I am none the wiser. My Observation may just be applicable to my paper/enlarger combination but without testing other papers to the same extent I may never know. At 13/01/2005 15:06 -0500, you wrote: >I have never had any problem getting sufficient contrast. > >I do not use graded paper and have no way to compare. > >I use a color head since it gives me the advantage of using a single filter. I >am usually not interested in maintaining a constant exposure time. I like a >bit >of snap in my prints but if I should ever want a true grade 2 then I would add >a >bit of yellow rather than using no filtration. Kodak says that for my enlarger >and their Polymax paper 10Y = G2 and 20M = G2-1/2. > >-----Original Message----- >From: pure-silver-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx >[mailto:pure-silver-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] >On Behalf Of Rob Champagne >Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2005 2:22 PM >To: pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx >Subject: [pure-silver] Re: New color head "discoveries" > > >Doing it this way do you find it difficult to get high contrast on VC paper >when >needed and >what happens when you dial in your paper manufacturers recommended setting for >grade 2, i.e. does contrast up, down or stay about the same? > >I suspect that Ilford work closely with Durst in the testing of their papers >which may explain my observations being somewaht different from yours if you >are >not using a Durst dichroic head. > >At 13/01/2005 13:56 -0500, you wrote: >>I adjust my film development times to yield negatives that print with >>normal contrast on VC paper *without* any filtration. Depending on the >>brand of paper this is comparable to a grade 2 to 2-1/2 graded paper. >>This usually requires developing for longer than the manufacturer's >>published times (which seem to be for condenser enlargers). Agfa is the >>only manufacturer that I know of that publishes film development times >>for different gammas (CI or whatever). I use filtration only for those >>negatives which need some tweeking. >> >>Jerry >> >>-----Original Message----- >>From: pure-silver-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx >>[mailto:pure-silver-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] >>On Behalf Of Rob Champagne >>Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2005 12:56 PM >>To: pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx >>Subject: [pure-silver] Re: New color head "discoveries" >> >> >>big snip >> >>> The filters of a color head will not give you the full range of >>>contrast available from VC paper with the use of dedicated filters. >>>They should give you a couple contrast grades on either side of >>>"normal" but filters should be used to obtain the maximum and minimum >>>contrast values. >> >>big snip >> >>>--- >>>Richard Knoppow >> >>I wonder whether my observation is true for other dichroic filter head >>enlargers. The Ilford Y+M figures for grade 2 on my Durst CLS501 head >>enlarger give approx an ISO grade 1 result on paper. It occurs to me >>that because dichroic filtration does not seem to give as much contrast >>as filter sets, and because most new enlargers have dichroic heads, >>that Ilford, and maybe other manufacturers, use this to its advantage in terms >of film speed. >>To get a true ISO grade 2 using ilfords G2 Y+M figures for my enlarger I have >to >>give the negative more development which in turn gives allows a faster film >>speed. So what I'm speculating here is that modern film speeds may be tailored >>by the manufacturers to suit printing on dichroic heads with Y+M filtration. >>It >>should be noted that by using increased development of the negative the >>overall >>contrast obtainable from a dichroic is not far short of a true G5 and if you >>take neg development far enough then a true G5 is obtainable from a dichroic >>head. >> >>It all depends on what you are tailoring your development to. Do it to >>0 filtration and your negs will be too soft for G5 on dichroic >>settings. Do it to G2 Y+M settings of your dichroic head and you will >>get faster film speed and availability of higher contrast in your >>print. >> >>======================================================================= >>========= >>============================= >>To unsubscribe from this list, go to www.freelists.org and logon to your >account >>(the same e-mail address and password you set-up when you subscribed,) and >>unsubscribe from there. >>=============================================================================== >============================== >>To unsubscribe from this list, go to www.freelists.org and logon to your >account (the same e-mail address and password you set-up when you subscribed,) >and unsubscribe from there. > >================================================================================ >============================= >To unsubscribe from this list, go to www.freelists.org and logon to your >account >(the same e-mail address and password you set-up when you subscribed,) and >unsubscribe from there. >============================================================================================================= >To unsubscribe from this list, go to www.freelists.org and logon to your >account (the same e-mail address and password you set-up when you subscribed,) >and unsubscribe from there. ============================================================================================================= To unsubscribe from this list, go to www.freelists.org and logon to your account (the same e-mail address and password you set-up when you subscribed,) and unsubscribe from there.