general question about surface

[Vaughn]

Carbon transfer prints look simply wonderful on Ilford matte (king) fibre.

Only glossy for me...personal tastes...

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Only glossy for me...personal tastes...

Of course! And that's my personal taste! ... even though my real personal taste is for acrylic sized art papers.

 

[MattKing]

Carbon transfer prints look simply wonderful on Ilford matte (king) fibre.

I saw what you did there!

 

[Vaughn]

So did I -- finally, with my usual delayed intelligence...

 

[David Lyga]

It isn't so much a lack of blacks, but rather the character of the blacks that are there.
Ink vs charcoal.

This sums it up, nicely. The black is really black, but not 'in your face'. That is what I like. - David Lyga

 

[tezzasmall]

Just to say that I too am an FB matt lover.

Terry S

 

[David Lyga]

Just to say that I too am an FB matt lover.

Terry S

There is something 'rich' about matte, although, correctly stated, matte has less tonal range. It is just that that 'range' is stated more grandly and reflections don't impinge onto the statement made. It is that simple and matte would not exist unless there were not people as 'crazy' as David Lyga.

I demand to go to Southend on the Sea and take a boat all the way up the Thames to London. - David Lyga

 

[Eric Rose]

I love matt surface for portraits however for most, not all, landscapes I find glossy better conveys the majesty and depth.