I just embarked on my first lith printing experiment, and it was a complete failure. I used Edwal's Litho-F Developer, diluted 1:6 and Ilford Multigrade FB Warmtone. From the instructions I had read, I understood that I needed to overexpose and underdevelop the print. I exposed my test prints from 30 seconds at f-11 to 6 minutes at f-4. All of them had their image start appearing after about 90 seconds to 120 seconds in the developer. I developed them anywhere from 90 seconds to 4 minutes. I most cases the prints looked like the were printed with a # 0 filter. I had a contrasty negative, and printed with a #3 filter. Generally the blacks were too weak and the highlights to gray. At no time did I get that wonderful sepia effect in the highlights that I like in lith prints. I understand that Ilford Warmtone paper is not the best for lith printing, but should give me somewhat of a lith effect. Is that correct? So, before I go out and buy new developer and new paper [ I guess Sterling or Forte Warmtone], I would appreciate some feedback on this:

Is the developer I am using ok?

Can one get lith prints from Ilford Warmtone FB?

Any idea of what I might be doing wrong if the developer and the paper are ok?

Many, many thanks for any input!

chris

-- Christian Harkness (chris.harkness@eudoramail.com), October 30, 2001

Answers

Rudman recommends warm lith (!) developer for developing on MGWT. It is advised to use paper that do no incorporate developer substances, such as Sterling, Maco, Forte, Oriental. You could try a redevelopment process where the print is developed normally, bleached and redeveloped in lith developer. I find the developing times you give too short, mostly a useful image appears after 10 to 20 minutes depending on the dilution. Therefore, I would recommend a longer exposure and a higher dilution.

-- Marc Leest (mmm@n2photography.com), October 30, 2001.

I would stick to some good (fixed grade) tested (for the Lith printing process) papers in your place. I strongly recommend Seagull Oriental G, Agfa Portriga and Brovira, Forte Fortezo Museum, Tetenal Art Sepia and Kentmere Kentona. Others may work well too, but those ones are the ones I KNOW that work fine. You may test some variable contrast paper and it may prove good for the process, but I dislike them even for normal work, so I would never choose one for such a complicated thing as lith printing. You may try the Moersch Photochemie Lith Developer, I find that it is quite easy to work with.

-- George Papantoniou (papanton@hol.gr), October 30, 2001.

I make a lot of lith prints, practically all of them with LP Lith developer (distributed my MACO, which is Cachet in the US) 1+16. Most of the time, I use MACO Expo R Papper, but Oriental New Seagull G, Forte Polywarmtone (both RC and FB), and Fortezo worked fine, too.

With MG Warmtone, I had the same disappointing experience. This paper is a poor lith printing paper, which probably owes to some phenidone incorporated in the emulsion to prolong shelf life.

In general, muddy looking, soft prints indicate too long an exposure. Perhaps the results will be somewhat better if you reduce exposure, starting at what you would normally use with conventional developer and going up to say two f-stops over-exposure. But, as I said, Ilford MG IV FB is a poor lith paper.

Regards, Thomas Wollstein

-- Thomas Wollstein (thomas_wollstein@web.de), October 31, 2001.