So does anyone make a less glossy paper than Ilford does?In my recent experience with Ilford, it's still as you describe. Glossy a bit too glossy, pearl a birth rough and matte has no real blacks. I use glossy but I'm unhappy with the choices and plan to use mostly baryta paper once I've built a washer.
Right, Satin, I think that's what I actually had, not Matte, and Satin already made the blacks too dull for my taste...Try Ilford Satin surface, for the comparison.
Personally I'm happy with Pearl and Satin.
Forgot to mention, Foma glossy surface is very similar to the Ilford glossy surface. I haven't used other surfaces from Foma.So does anyone make a less glossy paper than Ilford does?
pentaxuser
So a low numbered( in terms of respondents so far) conclusion so far might be that No there is no maker of glossy paper who has a glossy paper that is less glossy than Ilford'sRight, Satin, I think that's what I actually had, not Matte, and Satin already made the blacks too dull for my taste...
Forgot to mention, Foma glossy surface is very similar to the Ilford glossy surface. I haven't used other surfaces from Foma.
At fibre papers the supreme gloss is achieved by ferrotyping.Around ten years ago, fiber "glossy" finish papers from Ilford and ADOX changed. Perhaps because their customers are attracted to "shiny objects," the top coats were modified so that air-dried prints became much more reflective. Unless viewed under very controlled lighting conditions, those prints are difficult to appreciate due to veiling glare from reflections.
These opinions utterly irrelevant for anyone who could stand the surface of Cibachrome/Ilfochrome.
Not everyone ferrotypes their baryta paper prints, many like the air dried surface. I sure do, and would love an RC paper that looks like that - Pearl surface is supposed to, but to my eye doesn't cut it.At fibre papers the supreme gloss is achieved by ferrotyping.
Isn't it then not natural to try to mimic this with PC papers?
However one may argue that users of RC papers are not the same as users of fibre papers and thus may have different expectations to gloss.
Thanks - interesting.I also use some Arista grade 2 paper in glossy for prof’s which has much less gloss. That might be an avenue for you to try. I don’t know who actually makes that paper though.
Ilford pearl surface doesn't look like today's air-dried baryta surfaces. It looks, at least to my eye, like the air-dried surfaces of baryta papers of old, before their top coats were modified for more gloss.Not everyone ferrotypes their baryta paper prints, many like the air dried surface. I sure do, and would love an RC paper that looks like that - Pearl surface is supposed to, but to my eye doesn't cut it.
But tbh these considerations are based on feelings when holding a print. At reasonable viewing distance on the wall, both Gloss and Pearl look good to me, provided the lighting is decent. No print, including matte surfaces, is pleasant to view if the lighting promotes reflections.
Not really a reply to the above, Sal but your use of the word "today's" give me a chance to pass another observation on to nitroplait. In my 19 years' use of Pearl I can see no change in its looks. I cannot say if it looked the same, say 25-30+ years ago but I suspect not, otherwise others with a much longer experience of Ilford RC would have said soIlford pearl surface doesn't look like today's air-dried baryta surfaces.
Just in case anyone reading this doesn't follow your post, which should really be clear, let me emphasize that it's fiber-base glossy papers which have changed for the shinier, not Ilford's pearl RC surface, which remains as it has been for decades....In my 19 years' use of Pearl I can see no change in its looks. I cannot say if it looked the same, say 25-30+ years ago but I suspect not, otherwise others with a much longer experience of Ilford RC would have said so...
You did make it clear. That's why I wrote your post "should be clear," not "should be clearer."You're right Sal. I should have made it clear that I was only talking about RC Pearl . In fact my experience is confined to RC papers...
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?