MG Art 300 - Detroit

I remember the original print on MGIV... and I think this is even better. Shame about the sheen that you mentioned.

Yeah... the shine is kind of odd. I t would be nicer IMO if it were more like a fine watercolor surface. Like the Hahnemuhle Photo Rag. I'm guessing this helps with the dmax and that the plastic like feel is a coating that keeps it together in the wet process. All in all, really nice stuff, but not as I expected.

Nice image - the dimensions say 600 x 600 - if this is mm, is the print 23" square+? I ask as a scale reference for the texture.
There is a slight "line", vertical, inside the upper right corner, where the darker area blends to lighter. Is this because of the sheen reflection?

Good point, George. Actual print size is 6x6 inches. The digital file is 600 pixels square. That line you see is in the photograph and is another building further back in the fog. The best way I can describe the finish is like an un ferrotyped gloss paper with a more coarse texture. Here is a link to a magnified scan of a torn edge that might give a better idea.

Nice image, and the paper looks like a good match for it. It might be possible to apply a varnish, the kind used on pigment watercolor prints, that can bring the sheen down slightly.

Nice print, Bill. Like Andy, I remember the regular print of this, and I think I prefer the other one, if it matters.

I explored the Art 300 paper a bit too, and found exactly the same things you did. It's an interesting paper and I think that it works really well in pictures with well defined shapes. Like a close-up portrait, for example, or the grille of an old car. Other things I'm not so sure I like it with, but it sure is an interesting product.
I wonder if larger prints perhaps are better suited to this product, where the impression of the texture is less significant since the effect is spread out over a larger area. I only have 11x14" paper around, but would love to try some larger sheets some time.

Definitely interesting stuff, Brian. Well worth a try, but it does seem to suit certain images more than others.

Thomas Bertilsson said:

I wonder if larger prints perhaps are better suited to this product, where the impression of the texture is less significant...

Click to expand...

Another good point, Thomas. Personally I was hoping it would make smaller prints even more intimate with that platinum feel I go for in my silver prints. I think it does this nicely, but the drawback for me is the slight shine that you don't get with true watercolor papers. Hopefully I'll get used to it!

Very nice print, Bill. This is my only gripe with art300. I love the paper but even though it has impressive dmax, the sheen robs the dark areas/blacks of too much detail and I always find myself fighting it to get a good angle for proper viewing. It certainly suits certain images more than others but that was to be expected.

Lovely print that looks really well as a scanned print. Most people seem to be having a lot of problems getting a good scan from this paper. I love the paper myself but have yet to scan it. Did you do anything special when scanning yours?

Cheers
vincent