Fibre gloss vs RC gloss

Jessestr · Feb 21, 2016

Another question in my personal debate to test out fibre more or not... I recently printed on matte fibre, and didn't really like it over the RC version (both Ilford papers). Except that the warmtone looked more appealing to me, especially with selenium toning.

However, I still want to give fibre a chance. And I once read that fibre gloss is way different then RC gloss. Is this true or nonsense?

Many thanks

gone · Feb 21, 2016

I'm not crazy about matte either, but when you put it behind glass or plexi it looks fine. Fiber gloss might be considered gloss lite. You won't get those annoying glare areas in some lighting like w/ RC. I like it a lot, especially dry mounted. What you WILL get is deeper blacks, whiter whites (sounds like a commercial), and a lot more curly paper that will be a PITA to lie flat, but it's worth it. Buy yourself a sample pack from Freestyle Photo of their Adox MCC 110 Fiber Glossy and you may really like it too. I got lucky, as it was the first fiber paper I ever printed and can't imagine anything being better, but of course it depends on your subject matter and personal preferences.

Sirius Glass · Feb 21, 2016

I do not like mat paper. I have not bough mat paper for many years. I like gloss RC and FB papers.

MattKing · Feb 21, 2016

The glossy FB paper is only truly glossy if you ferrotype it.

And you don't want to worry about ferrotyping - trust me.

images39 · Feb 21, 2016

I use RC paper exclusively, but I find RC glossy to have a "plasticky" look to it. I only use glossy RC for contact sheets. The RC papers I use have a Pearl (Ilford) or Lustre (Kentmere) or Velvet (Foma) surface. Those surfaces are in between matte and glossy, and they just look right to me.

Dale

Sirius Glass · Feb 21, 2016

Sirius Glass said:
I do not like mat paper. I have not bough mat paper for many years. I like gloss RC and FB papers.

MattKing said:
The glossy FB paper is only truly glossy if you ferrotype it.

And you don't want to worry about ferrotyping - trust me.

Glossy RC and FB paper comes out glossy enough when I use my drum dryer with the emulsion facing the cloth. If I face the emulsion towards the shiny metal drum, the emulsion gets stuck to the drum and it takes a lot of work to clean the drum without scratching the surface.

Sirius Glass · Feb 21, 2016

The last time I did ferrotyping I was in high school.

Sirius Glass · Feb 22, 2016

Sirius Glass said:
The last time I did ferrotyping I was in high school.

APUGuser19 said:
So you recall it wasn't always dependable. Sometimes the print stuck. Caused by not cleaning the tin with Bon Ami, and fixing with older fixer. Sometimes the process worked out to textbook perfection. The print would just fall off all at once with a perfect finish. Those were the days. I felt a bit cheated or even subverted when RC came along and antiquated my technique. For a long time I srtuggled with unferrotyped spots, until a big fat bearded "Yankee" in the Ritz Camera told me of using the photo-flo. Nicest guy you'd ever want to meet.

Memories of ferrotyping have reinforced the resolve to buy a drum dryer and never ferrotype again. It usually worked well, but not all the time.

bence8810 · Feb 22, 2016

APUGuser19 said:
Ferrotyping isn't so hard if done right. You need fresh acid hardening fixer, and a clean tin. The tin can be cleaned with Bon-Ami. The print is fixed, washed, and placed in a tray of photo flo, as if it were film.

Hello,

I have tried and gave up ferrotyping, I found it to be too difficult. I always ended up with spots where the print wasn't completely glossy and it looked really awful.

I don't know what Bon-Ami is, can you explain? I can perhaps buy something equivalent here in Japan.

As for the photo-flo - first time I hear this. It has to be the film kind of photo-flo? What dilution, similar to what one uses for film?

Thanks, I might just give ferrotyping another go!
Ben

bence8810 · Feb 22, 2016

APUGuser19 said:
Bob-Ami is an American powdered cleanser like Comet and Ajax, except uses feldspar as the abrasive. "Hasn't scratched yet" is the company slogan. Same photo-flo dilution as film. It's the photo-flo that stops the un-ferrotyped spots and splotches. Be sure to use acid hardening fixer, or the prints will stick and be destroyed, depositing their emulsion on the tin and cannot be cleaned off, effectively ruining the tin.

Thank you - I have ferrotyped about 10 prints to date and none had the emulsion removed so I guess I am doing ok with the fixing.

The only issue was the little spots.
I did use a flatbed heater though - should I just go with your suggestion and let it air dry? In the flatbed it dries in about 10 minutes and does give a great glossy shine except the spots.

I use a hypo-clearing agent to speed up washing. Will this be of any issue?
Thanks,
Ben

bence8810 · Feb 22, 2016

APUGuser19 said:
The spots are due to not having used photoflo. Wash however you do, but guard against that process softening the emulsion, as characterized by "that slimy feeling" on the face of the print. 10 minutes is pretty quick. Can you dial down the heat just a bit to maybe 20 minutes?

Thanks - will give this a try. Amazing if this ends up working out - read so much about this topic prior to giving up.

My heater is a pretty old unit with no dials, i could perhaps turn it off every 5 minutes and then plug it back as it cools. Will experiment and report back!

Thanks a lot,
Ben

RalphLambrecht · Feb 22, 2016

Jessestr said:
Another question in my personal debate to test out fibre more or not... I recently printed on matte fibre, and didn't really like it over the RC version (both Ilford papers). Except that the warmtone looked more appealing to me, especially with selenium toning.

However, I still want to give fibre a chance. And I once read that fibre gloss is way different then RC gloss. Is this true or nonsense?

Many thanks

fiber gloss is much different from RCgloss;completely;fiber gloss, air dried is my favorite and similar to RCpearl. You have to see it to understand. just try a few finishes to find your favorite

Jessestr · Feb 22, 2016

APUGuser19 said:
Ferrotyped fiber base compared to RC is like comparing multi-coated to pre-war glass, in that order. I won't deny that RC paper has earned its place.

I really can't find anything about ferrotyping fibre paper online. I always end up on glassplates. Anyone has any resource about this or how it works, or any ferrotype vs non-ferrotyped fibre example?

Paul Howell · Feb 22, 2016

I use fiber glossy, most of the time I dry semi gloss only on occasion do I want a deep gloss and ferrotype a print. In the days before RC, prints for reproduction in newspapers needed to be glossy, while in college in the 60s we ferrotyped prints for the college newspaper, even in the 70s while in the Air Force we ferrotyped most of our prints, then along came RC.

Some of the older introduction to printing books had chapters on ferrotyping, look a book dated in the 60s or 50s.

RalphLambrecht · Feb 22, 2016

Jessestr said:
I really can't find anything about ferrotyping fibre paper online. I always end up on glassplates. Anyone has any resource about this or how it works, or any ferrotype vs non-ferrotyped fibre example?

There is nothing fancy about ferrotyping It simply(maybe oversimplyfied) refers to drying a FBprint face down on a highly-polished thin sheet of metal to get a glossy surface.The technique ost value when glossy RC was introduced because that was so much easier.Air dried FB is closer to RC pearl and much prettier in my opinion but YMMV.

AgX · Feb 22, 2016

EDIT: I was wrong...

msage · Feb 22, 2016

As I remember when I worked for a commercial photographer in the 70's we used a chemical (Pakosol?) not photoflo. Our system worked well and if we had a occasional problem we would re-soak and re-dry. The thing was we never ferrotyped double weight, just single weight. The gloss from this setup was amazing!

Mainecoonmaniac · Feb 22, 2016

I haven't ferrotyped glossy fiberbased paper in over 30 years. But it's the deepest black I've with any photo paper. I remember while in my college photo class drying prints in a ferrotyping paper dryer and the smell of Pakosol. You can have glossy prints if you put wet print facing up and matt if you put the print facing down on the dryer's canvas.

Paul Howell · Feb 22, 2016

msage said:
As I remember when I worked for a commercial photographer in the 70's we used a chemical (Pakosol?) not photoflo. Our system worked well and if we had a occasional problem we would re-soak and re-dry. The thing was we never ferrotyped double weight, just single weight. The gloss from this setup was amazing!

I had forgotten about the Paksol, I think we used a version made by Kodak, I have bottles of Kodak print flatting solution that I think also helps in ferrotying, I have a few packages of Salvich single wt, next time I print I will ferrotype a few.

Jim Noel · Feb 22, 2016

The base of No fiber paper is glossy, so no matter what emulso is placed on tp of it it wil not be truly glossy unless finished on a ferrotype plate.
RC paper is not paper ,but plastic. If you want a plastic look, this one is for you

Mainecoonmaniac · Feb 22, 2016

Because of the drought in the Western United States, I was thinking about using RC paper again. 1 hr of washing for FB prints vs 5 minutes for RC prints. I used to use more when I was a commercial photographer. All of the prints were used for reproduction anyway. But for personal work, I used FB paper. Over the weekend, I was looking at some contact sheets I made over 20 years ago printed on RC paper and I just didn't care for the look and feel of it. To me, RC paper's black always looked like a grayish black. I think if the print is framed and matted, it's no bad.

MattKing · Feb 22, 2016

Mainecoonmaniac said:
Over the weekend, I was looking at some contact sheets I made over 20 years ago printed on RC paper and I just didn't care for the look and feel of it. To me, RC paper's black always looked like a grayish black. I think if the print is framed and matted, it's no bad.

I wouldn't base my decision based on 20 year old RC paper - it has improved since then.

I use glossy RC fairly regularly for the APUG Postcard Exchange. For the right photograph, it works well.

ColColt · Feb 22, 2016

I never tried ferrotyping nor had the interest. Glossy RC was good enough for contact sheets and other photos not destined to be permanent. For that I used Oriental Seagul or Ilford Galerie...sometimes Agfa Brovira. I never cared for matte or what Ilford called their Pearl finish. With FB archival photos they got the two bath fixer treatment, hypo, etc., and later toning with Kodak's GP-1 gold toning formula.

Mainecoonmaniac · Feb 22, 2016

MattKing said:
I wouldn't base my decision based on 20 year old RC paper - it has improved since then.

I use glossy RC fairly regularly for the APUG Postcard Exchange. For the right photograph, it works well.

Oooh. Piqued my interest. What RC paper do you like? The 5 minute wash really appeals to me.

L Gebhardt · Feb 22, 2016

What you like is personal opinion. My opinion is don't like any RC papers enough to produce final work on them. I use RC for initial proofs and contact sheets. My taste runs to air dried glossy FB, though I do also like matte FB for some images.

There are ways to significantly reduce the amount of wash water used with FB paper.

Fibre gloss vs RC gloss

Jessestr

gone

Sirius Glass

MattKing

Moderator

images39

Sirius Glass

Sirius Glass

Sirius Glass

bence8810

bence8810

bence8810

RalphLambrecht

Jessestr

Paul Howell

RalphLambrecht

AgX

msage

Mainecoonmaniac

Paul Howell

Jim Noel

Mainecoonmaniac

MattKing

Moderator

ColColt

Mainecoonmaniac

L Gebhardt

Fibre gloss vs RC gloss

Moderator

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency