I think I'll move back to Ilford paper. I can't decide between glossy or pearl though damnit! Which do you prefer, I've never used Ilfords glossy before. How does it compare to the Agfa stuff?
I had two boxes of Agfa Multicontrast Premium RC in my early days of printing via e-bay. The guy selling thought that he had opened his prospective father-in-law's inkjet paper until the latter pointed out to him tha tit was darkroom paper! Only a couple of sheets were fogged and his father-in-law was giving up darkroom. Anyway the gloss was very good. Very white base and deep blacks as I recall. As new, it was expensive compared to Ilford even then. I didn't think the difference in price was justified so switched to Ilford which I had used on a B&W City and Guilds course.
There's also satin which is even more matt and appears to have more of a tooth to it. Less retailers seem to stock satin.If you do borderless prints which are passed around i.e. handled by friends, then fingermarks, yours or your friends, are not so obvious. I haven't tried handcolouring but I'd imagine that Pearl and Satin are probably more receptive to this.
I acquired some remnants of Tetenal paper, both glossy and semi-matt as it's called secondhand and again it was via e-bay. The glossy seems closer to Agfa than Ilford. That isn't to say it's better just different. Certainly it's faster. I had to change half way through a printing session and the Tetenal paper seemed to need about half the exposure. Per se this isn't an advantage.
As other have said, give a few papers a try. Some retailers seem to be able to get Agfa. Mr Cad in Croydon seems to be able to lay his hands on stocks from time to time and advertises it in Amateur Photographer. These days the range of advertisements and the Roger Hicks article at the back are about the only reason for reading AP if you're analogue.
pentaxuser