You guys are right. The stuff doesn't seem to be very good. Like I said, if it was good, everybody would be talking about it. Wouldn't they?
I just needed to hear some feedback. I wasn't producing work that really turned me on. I'm not really great at printing photos. I'm really out of practice.
But, when you try and try to do better work and it isn't going the way you want, something's got to be wrong. I didn't think it was all my fault. It had to be the paper I was using... at least partially.
It seems to be kind of finicky. It's like there is a narrow range where you can work and produce a good print (good but not great) but if you go outside those boundaries it turns to crap on you very quickly. Exposure is either too light or too dark. Blacks aren't saturated or else too dark. Whites are cloudy or else there is no detail. Contrast appears muddy. If you want to tinker, fiddle and fuss with it you can get a decent print out of it but nothing I would hang on the wall.
I'm not surprised. I knew it was cheap stuff when I bought it. I just didn't know HOW cheap. Well, I got what I paid for, didn't I?
But, for my first round or printing photos in 20 years, it was all right to use.
I did screw up a few times and I'm not so upset that I tore up several pieces of expensive stuff. Now that I've got that under my belt I can move on and buy something better.
If I don't use it up real soon I might put it away and save it for when the nephews come over to visit. They might have some fun making photographs the "old fashioned way." If they mess it up... what the hell? We had fun playing in the darkroom. Didn't we?
The shop where I bought it also had some Ilford paper. I think I'll stop in tomorrow and see what they've got.
Thanks, guys! Your input is valuable.