Ilford Art 300 samples

All this talk of Ilford Art 300 has me intrigued, but before I buy a pack of this premium paper--I'd love to see a sample print. Does Ilford send out sample swatches? Does anyone have a work print they'd send me for the cost of postage? It doesn't have to be big--just a properly exposed print with a nice full range of tones. Normally I'd just order it, but I'd like to see what the surface sheen looks like. Thanks.

Barry

Review of Ilford Art 300

I' am also curious about this paper.
Below the only review I could find on the net.

ilfordphoto.com/photocommunity/download.asp?n=1240

(I'am not aloud to place links witch is annoying but copy past en put the http in front of it your self and it should work)

Thanks, I forgot Ilford even had a forum, but there's plenty of good feedback on APUG. Nothing substitutes for being able to actually see the paper. Still looking for a work print, but even a test strip would be helpful. Anyone? Thanks.

PM me your address and I will happily send you a printed sample.

Simon ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology Limited

As an FYI : All our resellers around the world should have a swatch book available showing all our paper products ( including ART300 ).

Simon. ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology Limited :

Thank you Simon, PM sent. I was recently at the Penn Camera store in downtown DC (an Ilford reseller) and their swatch book was in sad shape--and alas--no Art 300. You might want to remind the resellers to actually put the new swatch books out for display.

Simon R Galley said:

As an FYI : All our resellers around the world should have a swatch book available showing all our paper products ( including ART300 ).

Simon. ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology Limited :

Click to expand...

I'm impressed! To see a rep of Illford active on APUG is a real honor... plus you have over 1100 posts just blows me away.

I have been in search of a comparable paper to replce my old AGFA Record Rapid n found Illford MGFB Warmtone to be about the closest so far. Films have improved so much over the years but papers have all but dissapeared. I just hope telling you this will inspire Illford to continue it's efforts to supply us with good materials to work with so we can keep film alive n well for another 200 years.

BTW B&H needs a new swatch book, theirs is missing papers and in rag tag condition.

Thanks Simon.

Hi Simon, Great to see you posting about the new paper.

I have been running it through the paces lately and like very much what I see. It is great to work with and I love the texture and how it compliments a certain type of photograph. However, the thing I am not so sure of is the somewhat reflective sheen the paper displays. I was under the impression that this was to be more like Hahnemuhle's digital "Photo Rag" paper with a dull, matt surface much like a watercolor paper. I'm finding this shine coupled with the texture to be distracting and am hearing the same from other photographers as well.



What I am wondering is if Ilford has any plans to offer a more traditional matt surface as in their other papers? If possible, I think it would be a great alternative and make the paper even more interesting to potential users. Personally I would buy the stuff by the case if so, but in its current state I can only see using it for the occasional project.

All that aside, I commend you and Ilford for your dedication to traditional photographic materials and I will continue using your products with great satisfaction. The fact you've actually developed a new paper is a testament to your commitment to those of us that still love the wet darkroom and I can only hope there will be more.

All the Best, Bill Schwab
www.billschwab.com

Dear Bill,

Pleased you like ART 300 : Its funny, Glossy unglazed FB outsells matt FB by a factor of 4 to 1 approx, when we went out on field trial to photographers around the world with ART 300 some of the questions on the questionnaire obviously relate to the surface, we got excellent feedback.

Perhaps as the product is now being used by a wider audience its kicking up more comment.

I would say this, you can matte down an emulsion used for coating, whether it would be viable to launch a matte version I cannot say and its very early days in the product life, so certainly not at the moment. When you have a matte version you also get the 'its D.Max is not as good as the 'glossier' version, this is 95% perception and about 5% fact. The reflective quality of the product is the thing, the photo emulsion on ART 300 certainly retains the bases inherent 'lustre' whereas an inkjet coating dulls it significantly due to the particulates in the ink jet coating. As always it comes down to personal taste, probably prints using ART 300 are more likely to be hung and split reflective surfaces can be tricky to view in high light.

I am aware of 'matte' sprays that are commercially available but could not speak of any archival effect they may have, I will see what is out there though.

Simon ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology Limited :

Simon R Galley said:

Pleased you like ART 300 : Its funny, Glossy unglazed FB outsells matt FB by a factor of 4 to 1 approx, when we went out on field trial to photographers around the world with ART 300 some of the questions on the questionnaire obviously relate to the surface, we got excellent feedback.

Click to expand...

Thanks for getting back to me on this, Simon. I am not surprised you got good feedback as it appears to be a very nice paper for some applications. And while I realize that a matt surface is an acquired taste much like platinum printing, Dmax isn't the holy grail for all of us out here. This is in large part the reason that Photo Rag is so popular among so many and why I and so many others were so excited to hear that you were working on a Photo Rag based paper. Unfortunately though, the photographic version of the paper doesn't display this quality with its shiny coating.

I also mentioned in the (there was a url link here which no longer exists) that I suspected it is some sort of resin coated hybrid, though I was told via the Ilford Facebook page that this is not the case. However, having been able to separate the coating from the paper base, it feels very much like a polymer of some sort and this concerns me as to its archival quality. They also directed me to a page that spoke of the shorter wash times. This also leads me to believe there must be some kind of resin coating as I am questioning how a heavier than normal, fiber based paper could in fact have shorter wash times? Something doesn't add-up.

Thanks again, Simon. Please forgive me for seemingly looking a "gift horse in the mouth" because I want to love and use this paper. However, I also need to be able to be sure of what I would be potentially selling collectors. I'll do some more testing and perhaps a 3rd party analysis before putting it into rotation in my darkroom. Also, if you could shed more light on the coating and reason for shorter wash times, it would be very much appreciated.

Dear Bill,

The emulsion element of any ( monochrome ) coating is 'archivally' incredibly stable, the issue of archival permanence usually relates to the stability of the substrate base, or any 'subbing' applied to that base to allow the coating of the emulsion layer(s). BUT fundamentally, the 'real' archival issue element actually relates to the chemical take up of the base whilst processing, so, Baryta base is the most stable base but takes up the highest volume of chemistry, so needs the extended wash times to make it archivally permanent. The base used on ART 300 is an incredibly stable base and is archivally excellent but is less porous than Baryta and therefore takes up less chemical into its structure, hence the shorter wash times.

If you balance this to RC products the modern ILFORD RC coatings on RC are very stable and archival, but the base actually has an expected 50 to 80 year life before it could (or will) break down gradually, hence RC product cannot be deemed as 'archivally permanent in the truest sense of the word.

Regards

Simon ILFORD photo / HARMAN technology Limited :

I'm sure your feedback came back as positive as you mentioned, that's because it's a good paper. But I'm also sure the photographers that you contacted to do the tests and evaluation being the elite--no pejorative connotation intended--might have had a self-selecting bias toward a specific kind of paper, and this one paper might have fallen into that bias. Now that you have a bigger sample of people to draw from, you're probably getting feedback more in keeping with the bias of the rest of us mortals, and perhaps the real market ;-) . Again, the paper is fantastic, that's just one of its characteristics.

Dear squinonescolon...

Whilst you are correct, we are truly honoured by the people who test our products and many who have indeed deservedly huge reputations and knowledge... but we ensure that our testing is multi-national and spreads across a wide cross section of photography / applications and also includes colleges and students, and home darkroom enthusiasts as well..breadth is very important.

Its also why I personally check all the feedback good, bad and indifferent on all our products and services on a daily basis from APUG as all of you are our absolute key customer base, users and opinion leaders and we value your experiences with our products and those of our competitors.

Simon ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology Limited :

Fair enough. Thanks for engaging here.

Brother, can you spare a test strip?

Still looking for a small sample of Art 300--even a test strip would be great. Apparently, there are mysterious forces preventing a sample from traveling between Mobberley and Maryland. Thanks!