Does anyone know the resolving power in lines per mm, or lines per inch, of any B&W papers? Particularly the popular papers Ilford RC Multigarde, Ilford Fibre Multigrade, Agfa RC Multigrade and Agfa Fibre Multigrade. Are there any papers with really superior resolving power? We always talk of emulsion and lens resolving power but rarely hear of paper pring resolving power. Can anyone help? David Strachan

-- David Strachan (strachan@cww.octec.org.au), May 24, 2000

Answers

David, I have been wondering about this myself. I have noticed that the Bergger paper I am using is a little sharper to my eye than Iford MGV fiber. I have no idea as to why this is, but I can notice a difference in an 8x1-0 print of the same neg.

-- Bill Shaden (bshaden@rocketmail.com), May 24, 2000.

More than enough!!

-- Pete Andrews (p.l.andrews@bham.ac.uk), May 25, 2000.

If you are looking at a print and resolving power is what you're looking for, then throw away the print. Bresson and all the rest didn't care about resolving power. They cared about what the image had to say. And content should overcome any resolving power issues if there are any which I find hard to beleive there is much difference. James

-- james (james_mickelson@hotmail.com), May 25, 2000.

David, Pete has given the you the definitive answer.

I know this question comes up periodically, and for some reason many people presume paper has low resolution capability. Let me point this out: paper has substantially lower silver content (and sensitivity) than film; therefore, in principle, paper emulsions can be thinner than film and have smaller grains. Given this, what could possibly cause paper to have deficient resolution compared to film? (Actually, lack of antihalation layers in paper probably kills a little resolution).

Ctein (in his book) has apparently done some testing and says (as I recall) some B&W papers go to ~ 125 line pairs/mm (lpmm).

If you are able to see the limit of film resolution with your naked eye (I'm joking; this is extremely improbable), then paper limits may be of concern to you; otherwise re-read Pete's post.

Note to Bill Shaden: Bill, sharpness is not quite the same thing as resolution. I can't imagine that you can see the limit of paper resolution in either case; however I can accept that there might be "sharpness" differences between the papers that you CAN see. However, there might be a good possibility that you are having a focus discrepancy related to an odd spectral mismatch between paper sensitivity and your eye. Ctein also discusses this kind of thing in his book.

-- Bill C (bcarriel@cpicorp.com), May 25, 2000.

You can see the difference between various papers. Old Oriental and Gallerie graded papers were sharper than multigrade. It may be due to the paper, or the way the colored MG light acts. It really doesn't matter, though. Graded is always sharper when I use it. Of course, today, I hardly ever use it.

-- E.L. (ELPERDIDO65@HOTMAIL.COM), May 26, 2000.

There are many reasons as to why different papers look sharper than others. If you are interested, you can find the answers in many books. My favorites are: Basic Photographic Materials+ Processes- Stroebel. The Focal Encyclopedia of Photography. Already mentioned, Post Exposure- Ctein. Quality Enlarging With Kodak Black and White Papers. Enlarging-C.I.Jacobson.

There being so many factors involved in this, it is my guess that the difference in sharpness of various papers, that I actually see, has more to do with each papers emulsion, characteristic curve, and D-max of paper surface, rather than resolution.

-- Bill Shaden (bshaden@rocketmail.com), May 27, 2000.

Paper surface has an obvious effect on perceived sharpness.

-- denmark (rjepsen@mmcable .com), July 17, 2000.