Slow learner?.AZO Paper

[mike_pry]

Am I a slow learner or does it take awhile to come to grips with AZO?

I have been playing with it as time allows for about 8 months and only now is it starting to impress me. I heard all this stuff about it and really was interested so I bought a 100 box off 8X10 and at first wasn't impressed like everyone else claimed. I shoot 8X10 and 5X7 Ilford HP5 Plus. At first it looked rather bland but after playing and playing and then stumbling on Michael and Paula Smiths article on it it started getting better. His tecnique on "outflanking the print" is just what I needed. All I can say now is WOW! But it makes me wonder if I am the only one who didn't see these almost magical properties at first? If you haven't tried it I would really recomend it as it is very cool. The pictures especially the 8X10 contacts look as if they are 3-D. Also a big thanks to everyone in this forum for helping me get onto the large format thing and imparting a wealth of knowledge.

[psychophoto]

Maybe a year and a half ago I tried some Azo and really wasn't

thrilled with it. The prints maybe hinted at the possibilities, but

I wasn't getting anything I though I couldn't match on my enlarging

paper. About 3 months ago I bought a 100 box from Michael Smith and

I am absolutely hooked on Azo. Maybe my 8x10 technique has just

improved enough that my negatives are more suitable to the stuff now,

but the results really do speak for themselves. I have yet to try

Azo in amidol (financial considerations), but have had great luck

with it in Ansco 130. In fact, I'll be spending a good part of the

day tomorrow making a series of prints for sale on Azo (hint- great

gift idea....support your local student photographer....he he). I'm

also shooting HP5 and really like the results I've been getting with

it. Bergger BPF in PMK can also make some great negatives for Azo.

[brian_ellis3]

I use Azo quite a bit for 8x10 contact prints. I've tried comparisons

with enlarging paper in my normal developer (Ilford Universal 1-9)

vs. Azo in "normal" developer and also in Amidol. I don't think the

difference between Azo and enlarging paper is the kind of difference

that's going to knock your socks off and I think it's too bad that

some of the raves about it get a little out of hand because people

then expect to see a bigger difference than they're likely to get.

Let's face it, an 8x10 contact print is pretty nice on any paper.

IMHO, however, Azo does make a difference, it's just kind of subtle

and I don't think you necessarily even fully appreciate it until

you've worked with it for a while. The main difference for me between

Azo in Amidol and Azo in Ilford Universal is that Amidol produces a

warmer tone, actually a slightly greenish look that has to be removed

by toning in selenium. That's is a little tricky because the print

has to be pulled from the selenium at just the right time to

eliminate the greenish tint but avoid the purple tone that too much

time or conentration can produce with selenium. Untoned Azo in

Ilford Universal developer produced a bluish tint that in a few

prints I actually kind of liked but mostly I wanted to get rid of it

with selenium (I think that was the combination that produced the

bluish tint, it's been a while since I did all this and I now just

routinely use Azo in Amidol followed by selenium).

[ben_calwell]

Michael ...

I've been agonizing over Azo for a while now. In my case, Azo isn't

the "magic bullet" paper that others claim it to be. I can't seem to

make up my mind if my prints look good or flat on the stuff (grade

2). I've been told by one well-respected photographer that they are

indeed flat, but others look at the same prints and tell me they are

beautiful. Regardless of the flat verdict, I like the long scale and

soft tonality. I plan to keep working with Azo and maybe going for

denser negatives for a tad more punch.

[ed b.]

I had tried Azo a few years ago, developed in Dektol, and wasn't very

satisfied with the results. But after reading Michael Smith's claim

that Azo produces a greater tonal range than platinum I thought I'd

give it a try again. This time I used the Peckham amidol formula and

I have to say I was very impressed. Negatives that I previously

dodged and burned printed effortlessly on Azo, reproducing the full

tonal range with no manipulation other than extending or reducing

development and agitation. The nice thing about the Peckham formula

is that it is relatively cheap (for an amidol formula) and gives a

neutral print color. I toned most of them in selenium and really like

the purple-brown color I got with this combination. I have a brief

article on my results with Azo, and some print reproductions that

give a vague idea of the tones I achieved, on my site at <a

href=http://unblinkingeye.com>UnblinkingEye.Com</a>. The formula for

Peckham amidol is on my formulas page.

[george_huczek]

I just started working with Azo a few months ago. It took a while to

get used to using it. I am still learning how to work with it. I was

having trouble getting prints to come out _exactly_ the same, for a

combination print I was putting together. An extra 5 seconds of

exposure, or an extra few seconds in a 1 minute Amidol developer and

there were enough differences in tonality that prints would not butt

together properly for a larger mural. Also, when flipping the

negative to do reverse prints for my mural, I had to change exposure

and development times to get prints exactly the same. Contact

printing emulsion-side up requires additonal exposure and development-

- not much, but more nevertheless as I have discovered. I am not

sure why this happens -- perhaps it is due to how much reflection

each surface of the film provides.

 

<p>

 

Compared with Ilford Multigrade contact prints in Bromophen and

Ilford Multigrade developers, I can see the difference with Azo in

amidol. Azo gives a greater impression of depth to the image. It's

startling and not that subtle when prints are examined side-by-side.

I still have to learn how to adjust contrast grade with Azo. I have

yet to be able to get a decent half-grade contrast adjustment with a

water bath. Creasing and "pinching" have also been a problem, but I

like the way the single-weight paper drymounts. Colour tinting due

to rapid fixing, and learning how to adjust tones subtly with

selenium toner are adding to the learning curve with this paper, but

it is interesting material to work with.

[echard_wheeler]

I use hp5 8x10 and Azo grade 3 in dektol toned in selenium and love

it. I can not seem to make a neg that works on grade two. It does

seem to make everything flat. I have gotten good results by taking

what I need from Michael and Paula's info. The differences are subtle

but seeable.

 

<p>

 

ec

[paul2]

I wonder what grade of AZO folks "standardize" on. Since it has a

longer scale is grade 2 AZO realistically comparable to an average

grade 2 enlarging paper? Has anyone enlarged and contact printed the

same neg on grade 2 AZO and a grade 2 enlarging paper with similar

results?

 

<p>

 

I ask as I too have had a bit of trouble with flat prints using AZO

grade 2. It would be nice if there were a way around the contrast

issue that did not require frequent use of grade 3 AZO, as it is not

as convenient to obtain as 2 and it seems pricier as well. Perhaps it

just requires a denser negative than I am used to making?

 

<p>

 

Paul G.

[michael_a._smith1]

I just read all of the comments and there is a lot to respond to here.

First, the comment that the differences between Azo and enlarging paper

"won't knock your socks off." Well that depends on what color socks you

wear. To a trained eye, the differences are anything but subtle. To an

untrained eye, I can see that the differences might not be that

noticeable. It is like listening to music. A trained musician can hear

the difference between different performers' renditions of a piece of

music. Most others cannot, or see the differences as "subtle" while the

trained musician might see them as huge differences.

 

<p>

 

Problem with flat prints on Grade 2: Generally this is caused by

negatives not having enough contrast. Solution: develop your negatives

longer. Or use Grade 3 paper.It is difficult to overdevelop a negative

that will be contact printed on Azo. I did compare a Grade 2 Azo print

with the same negative printed on enlarging paper. Kodak had sent me

Polyfibre or some such paper to test. I had always thought of Azo as a

"soft" paper, but to my surprise to match the midtone separations on

Grade 2 Azo I had to use a #4 filter with the Polyfibre and even then

the Azo print had more of a glow in the midtones.

 

<p>

 

I have printed negatives that people have sent me that were printed in

Peckham's formula for Amidol. The prints, when compared to the prints

made in the formula that Paula and I use, seemed cooler and not quite

as rich. The differences were subtle, but to our eyes they were there.

 

<p>

 

Creasing and Pinching of prints: If you hold them between thumb and one

finger neither pinching nor creasing should occur. The problems

generally occur when the print is held between the thumb and two

fingers.

 

<p>

 

Half-grade with water bath: try 30 seconds in Amidol; 30 seconds in

water. This works best with Amidol. I've never seen it not work and

cannot understand why it hasn't for whomever posted that message.

Something doesn't seem right. E-mail me with questions and maybe I can

help you figure out the problem.

 

<p>

 

Grade 3 paper is just as convenient to obtain as Grade 2. We stock it.

In 100-sheet boxes it is a little more expensive than Grade 2 (in 500-

sheet boxes it is the same price), because Kodak discontinued it and

only reinstated it because I spoke to them almost every week for six

months, trying to convince them to keep that catalogue number active.

They finaly agreed to do so but only on "Special Order." Kodak prices

all special orders higher. We bought 108 boxes--the minimum-- and have

it on hand, and, as long as there is demand, we always will.

 

<p>

 

See our web site: www.michaelandpaula.com for full information about s

and availability of Azo (under "Azo") and for information on its use

see my articles (under "Writings").

 

<p>

 

Michael A. Smith