Dealing with reflectivity differences after spotting prints

[backseatpilot]

In an effort to make my life as miserable as possible, I have been trying to manually spot/retouch my prints. However, the spotting dyes always end up looking slightly different than the finish of the paper - either too matte compared to glossy paper, or too shiny when used on matte/pearl paper. Is there a way of combating this, or is it just how things used to be? Should I shellac the print or something after I'm done to have an even surface?

 

[logan2z]

Which spotting dye are you using? I use the Marshall's dyes (no longer available, unfortunately) and they blend perfectly with the papers I've used them with. That includes Ilford Multigrade Fiber Glossy, Ilford Multigrade Art 300, and Foma Fomabrom Variant III Glossy. This is the only spotting dye I've used that is invisible to my eye once dry on these papers. I've also tried Peerless Dry Spot Retouching Sheets and Fotospeed's DY10 B&W Retouch Kit, but both of these left clearly visible marks on the paper.

Once I run out of the Marshall's dyes (which, thankfully, could take years at the rate I use them) , I'm not sure what I'm going to use.

 

[Carnie Bob]

I am not sure if this will help you , but when using kodak retouch colour dyes the last stage was to put a kettle on and steam the print, the dyes would suck in the emulsion and not be apparent, may work for spotting dyes.

 

[backseatpilot]

Which spotting dye are you using?

I've been using the Peerless stuff, mostly with Ilford FB matte paper. On the glossy paper (RC and fiber) it hasn't been as noticeable.

On an unrelated note, the "lamp black" looks extremely purple compared to the tone of the matte paper so I probably need to find a new retouching dye anyway.

 

[Ian C]

Real spotting dye—used correctly—doesn’t alter the reflectivity of prints. If that’s what you see, then this suggests that the specific material you’re using isn’t working correctly, or its sitting atop the surface instead of being properly absorbed into the gelatine coating of the print. It takes time, practice, and patience to learn how to spot properly.

It used to be common to apply a thin coat of protective spray photo lacquer as a final topcoat of prints. I’m uncertain but I think that these specialized photo lacquers are no longer marketed in the digital age.

I have used automotive clear coat lacquer on some black & white prints after all spotting was done to protect the surface and ensure a uniform surface finish. I believe that this is usually a nitrocellulose lacquer. Newer versions might use different materials.

This can be useful when prints must be displayed in a humid environment. I do so after mounting the print on foamcore or other non-water-absorbent support. Then I overspray the edges of the print and unto the support to seal out dirt and humidity. Those prints that I’ve treated in this manner haven’t changed in over a decade.

McDonald UV-Protective Photo Lacquer was marketed as a UV protector for color prints. The following article claims that the UV-protection of color prints using this product is not useful.

http://wilhelm-research.com/pdf/HW_Book_04_of_20_HiRes_v1c.pdf