How are people liking the new Ilford papers?

[Sal Santamaura]

Both Tru Vue AR glass and Art glass only filter about 70% UV light. Conservation clear and museum glass both filter 99% UV light. Wouldn’t you want more UV light blocking for your prints?...

Black and white prints framed behind glass that filters less of ambient UV are not an issue for me because there's almost no ambient UV in the house. Windows are double-pane, so they're already removing 0.7 x 0.7 meaning 51% of any daylight UV is getting in. Framing glass multiplies 0.49 x 0.7 meaning only roughly one third of any daylight UV could possibly reach the print. I don't ever let direct sunlight hit a frame, and even indirect sunlight, i.e. reflected and/or diffused by shutters or blinds is rare throughout the day/year. I have no fluorescents or halogens anywhere; LEDs now provide all the artificial illumination here. Thus, UV is a negligible factor in the deterioration of those prints. Visible light "wearing out" optical brightening agents represents a print life expectancy determinant orders of magnitude more significant than UV. The short answer to your question is "because plastic UV blocking layers on glass distort the color of mats and prints, that's why."

In California, frame shops discourage using glass in framing pictures and photographs. They recommend plastic.

I ignore that recommendation and always have. Any framed pictures hung in my California home are secured to wall studs. They do not move in earthquakes we've experienced up to around magnitude 5.6. Anything larger than that and I'll be more concerned about the house and our safety than the prints. In the meantime, I enjoy looking at images unimpaired by static-charged, scratch-susceptible acrylic and the dust it's attracted.

But in the end, isn’t the ideal for the final print to be framed and displayed, and not sitting in a box or flat file somewhere?

There are many things in life that are less than ideal. Given the choice between ending my making of prints when wall space to hang them runs out or continuing to enjoy photography by making prints and viewing them from time to time, I elected the latter. Your priorities may differ.

 

[GregY]

I prefer Bergger CB and NB above any Ilford paper. Recently I discovered Rollei 311, which is perhaps even better than Bergger. As claimed by the manufacturer, it is very much like good old Agfa’s MCC. For contact sheets I use Fomaspeed. I’m not interested in PE papers as an end product, I’d rather scan and print digital in that case.

Well i would not go as far as digital printing, but while i might use a small amount of rc/ year proofing, all my final prints, regardless of size are on FB paper.

 

[Pieter12]

There are many things in life that are less than ideal. Given the choice between ending my making of prints when wall space to hang them runs out or continuing to enjoy photography by making prints and viewing them from time to time, I elected the latter. Your priorities may differ.

You could rotate prints on your walls. By the way, how are your frames secured to the walls studs?

 

[Sirius Glass]

You could rotate prints on your walls. By the way, how are your frames secured to the walls studs?

Just sell your place and buy a larger place with more wall space and then set up the darkroom again.

 

[Pieter12]

Just sell your place and buy a larger place with more wall space and then set up the darkroom again.

In California, just build an ADU and make it your personal gallery. No need to move.

 

[removedacct3]

In California, just build an ADU and make it your personal gallery. No need to move.

For the uninformed .... what's an ADU?

 

[Pieter12]

For the uninformed .... what's an ADU?

Auxilary Dwelling Unit. Usually a converted garage, but can be a free-standing structure like a small guest house.

 

[DREW WILEY]

ADU = A Doghouse, as Usual. That's the most people in California can afford anymore. Or here along the Bay, the alternative is a rusting camper shell in the marsh, accessible at low tide. You sleep on the roof when the tide is in. But at least it costs slightly less than a million dollars; real doghouses, slightly more.

 

[Sirius Glass]

ADU = A Doghouse, as Usual. That's the most people in California can afford anymore. Or here along the Bay, the alternative is a rusting camper shell in the marsh, accessible at low tide. You sleep on the roof when the tide is in.

Sour grapes. Did someone wake up on the wrong side of the bed today? The post was about adding on to an existing owned house.

 

[Sal Santamaura]

...how are your frames secured to the walls studs?

Heavy screw eye in the stud (eye recessed below surface of drywall), double heavy picture wire pulled taught through the screw eye and fastened, with some difficulty, to the other side of the frame while it's very close to the wall.

In California, just build an ADU and make it your personal gallery. No need to move.

Those who advocate for Accessory Dwelling Units are apparently unfamiliar with homeowners associations' covenants and restrictions.

 

[DREW WILEY]

I'd hardly call them add-on "houses". Some are done as bootleg "in law cottages"; others, now according the new codes allowing official rental properties in backyards. Some are high very narrow stacked condos selling at exorbitant prices even in back yards; others, "micro-homes" considerably smaller than the average suburban bedroom. One across the street has just been converted from a detached garage-sized sound studio, another built over what was basically a handkerchief lawn, and yet another, somehow barely squeezed into a back yard, yet with a whole family in it. The whole back half of my own lot is taken up by a sizable commercial building, originally housing a gun-smithing business, but now my own shop and darkroom complex. Out in front of that, the outdoor cats have their own little makeshift but dry and cozy "hotel", directly under a big outdoor workbench. They never pay the rent on time, but we love em anyway.

Adding on to an existing house is voodoo in this State because it gives them cause to reset your property taxation at a much higher current level, at least if you do it legally by permit. If you don't, they can come after you with a hefty fine added to the permit fee, with higher taxation anyway. Smarter just to "park" an RV, or retrofitted cargo container out back where allowed, since those are removable.
Not like out in the country, where the tax assessor gets rock salt shotgunned into his butt if snooping around.

I did my darkrooms under permit. But that didn't add to my fees because it was still classified as the same single big room, even with added partitions, and none of that was new dwelling space. A couple of those walls are removable if ever necessary because the floor joists are deliberately secured using concrete screws rather than anything requiring real demo techniques; and the wall material itself is thin fiberglass panel. The rooms deeper in use standard framing for sake of high quality R23 insulation and easy heating in winter. No need for that in the picture framing area; the damn drymount press itself is high-wattage enough.

My own indoor gallery/studio space concept ended once I got remarried, and my wife turned it into a DIY animal rescue room and kitty old folks home. I can still do gallery mockup displays and test lighting in there; but it's not longer a suitable print client space. Sensitive subject. Right now it's a kitty hospice, as our little old lady 23 years old appears to be entering her last days, and not likely to make it to 24.

 

[Pieter12]

Heavy screw eye in the stud (eye recessed below surface of drywall), double heavy picture wire pulled taught through the screw eye and fastened, with some difficulty, to the other side of the frame while it's very close to the wall.

Seems like a heavy shaker would cause the glass to break anyway. Why not screw the frames directly into the walls like they do in museums?

Those who advocate for Accessory Dwelling Units are apparently unfamiliar with homeowners associations' covenants and restrictions.

Only if you live in a regulated community. I'm surprised they don't dictate what you can put on your walls, too. ADUs are pretty much legal throughout California.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Not anymore, even if resented in some communities. Rules are changing, ironically in a very contentious manner over in Silicon Valley, where the cost of acquiring a home is extreme. People should have a right to their nice lots with some space between neighbors. But there's also tremendous pressure from the "affordable housing" crowd who don't want to commute great distances. And in that context, "affordable" and the notion of an acceptable living space is in line with "low income" meaning a young techie couple who makes less than $350 K per annum combined.

It's already a concept in full swing in Berkeley, where 3-story condos only ten feet wide are going into people's back yards at "bargain pricing" of 750K or more apiece, per narrow loft. Follow all the Statehouse chatter and debate to learn the latest - cause I'm sure not gonna do that. I retired for sake of peace of mind. But "affordable housing" is now a priority in this State. Move to the countryside, and expect the inability to even buy fire insurance, and when available, at extremely high prices. Facts of life; the "new norm".

I sold my rural property simply because it was getting unrealistic to keep up, looking forward to retirement. Cutting big trees, clearing fire hazards over many acres multiple times per season, constantly repairing fences, removing big rocks, endless house maintenance
(three buildings), attending to the gardens and vineyard, fixing water wells.... all fun and rewarding at the right time of life, but no longer.

 

[MattKing]

I think this thread has moved into a new neighbourhood that itself is entirely off topic.
Unless someone is using darkroom prints as a construction material, can we please return to the subject of the latest Ilford brand photographic papers?

 

[pentaxuser]

I think this thread has moved into a new neighbourhood that itself is entirely off topic.
Unless someone is using darkroom prints as a construction material, can we please return to the subject of the latest Ilford brand photographic papers?

I agree, Matt. I felt it was ADU to what members thought of Ilford papers or is that adieu?

pentaxuser

 

[DREW WILEY]

My brother wallpapered his own darkroom with Natl Geo maps? Does that count?

 

[Sal Santamaura]

Seems like a heavy shaker would cause the glass to break anyway. Why not screw the frames directly into the walls like they do in museums?...

Because my home is not a museum, that would be too much trouble for no additional benefit, and the glass would break in a strong earthquake anyway.

 

[Joel_L]

I have always liked Ilford paper for B&W. I just recently got back into doing darkroom prints and picked up Ilfords MGRC Deluxe ( New ) in pearl finish. I think I like it just fine for general prints. Went through a box of 100 5x7 pretty quick, now have a box of 250.

 

[Richard Jepsen]

Its already a concept in full swing in Berkeley, where 3-story condos only ten feet wide are going into people's back yards at "bargain pricing" of 750K or more apiece, per narrow loft.

There is lots of space in middle of the country. I would move.

I am printing on Ilford Warm Tone RC with pearl finish. If I have a great image I print on WT fiber. With my just delivered papers I am not seeing any meaningful, if any, difference between untoned RC and fiber. I’m surprised. In years past using the same papers I did see a meaningful difference. The two papers speed/contrast are virtually identical saving me time if I print the RC image on fiber.

This year I accepted RC. The process time savings allows me to print. Its taken 25 years but now I prefer quality Ilford RC. RC works best to tip into a folio due to its flat surface. Behind glass you can’t tell RC and fiber apart.