Silk Surface Papers

[AZD]

Ah yes, photo paper with a “silk” textured surface. Anyone here remember it, or use it in the past? Anyone still a fan of this tactile, tacky paper? Personally I really like it. To me the individual photos become more like artifacts, something to enjoy in a way that cannot be replicated by a screen.

The internet says it was quite popular for bridal and wedding photos because the texture makes it impossible to view (and copy) without a reflection somewhere. I remember seeing wedding pictures with it. Maybe some baby pictures, and at least several small 1970s or 80s color snapshots, too, so it wasn’t just weddings.

I am interested because recently a large quantity has followed me home: 400 5x7 sheets of Agfa Brovira BW117 G2, and 25 of 5x7 Kodak Portralure Y G3. Both print as expected, even though they expired in ~1980 and 1973, respectively.

I wish I had as much of the Kodak as the Agfa. Portralure is greenish out of the developer but tones in selenium from neutral black to brown to reddish. Only 25 sheets (well, 23 now) to see just how retro-70s tacky I can get.

The Brovira is more restrained with that classic cool look, and has a finer silk texture. Not quite sure how to optimize it yet, but I’ll think of something.

Anyhow, just wondering where this nearly-forgotten paper lives in your memories.

 

[Paul Howell]

I have few sheets of Salvich (sp?) silk textured left, must 12 years old by now, bought it when B&H carried a wide range of Slavich papers, I used it for portraits, had only 1 packet of 25 sheets. My Kodak data guide from the 60s lists Y as silk but K seems to have more texture. I liked V, was sad when all of the textured matt papers were discontinued as commercial work shifted to color.

 

[Mr Bill]

Ah yes, photo paper with a “silk” textured surface. Anyone here remember it, or use it in the past?

Yeah, it was fairly common for portrait work circa 1970s, maybe into the 1980s, at least in the US. I don't really know the history of how this came about; I just presumed that the sense of being a more "luxurious" sort of surface helped to justify charging a higher price. And, like other "professional" textured papers, prints could be viewed from nearly any angle without excessive "glare" being reflected. (In the case of glossy paper, for example, you don't wanna hang a framed print on a wall where the viewers have large windows behind them; the shiny reflection could make it nearly impossible to see detail in the darker parts of the print.)

FWIW the silk surface really killed off fine detail, so it was not very suitable for small prints. (I'm speaking of the surface called 'Y' by Kodak.) Part of the effect was also to swallow up film grain, so one could sorta get away with using smaller film.

You mentioned the difficulty for someone trying to make (unauthorized) copies. The 'Y' paper surface had an array of tiny dimples sticking up. A print could be copied easy enough, but the result showed the dimples. So if someone printed a copy neg onto a gloss paper, for example, the uneven dimple effect showed up, making it fairly obvious that it was a "pirate" print, not one from the original photographer.

Fwiw, circa 1980s as I recall, a photographic trade group (the PMA, I think) did a "sting operation" on some large outfits that specialized in making copies. After some sizeable lawsuits for making copies of portraits that were marked with a copyright symbol the copy specialists started to police their own industry. Such that if someone brought in an apparently professional image to be copied, the copy shop would typically want to see a "release" from the copyright holder (the professional photographer). Around this time, I think, the silk texture papers sorta went out of style, which I think may be related. Or maybe not. I would say that the Kodak 'E' surface finish sorta become the de facto standard for such work.

I'm from an outfit that owned a large portrait studio chain, so had quite a lot of experience with this sort of thing.

 

[F4U]

Remember back in the 70's after the 110 Instamatics were popular and all the drug store labs gave "borderless silk" prints? Probably a feeble attempt to mask the awful grain and lack of sharpness. Looked terrible. I never liked "silk" prints ever since, and probably because of that.

 

[koraks]

Anyhow, just wondering where this nearly-forgotten paper lives in your memories.

Color RA4 paper still comes in this finish. It's not for me.

 

[BMbikerider]

I have few sheets of Salvich (sp?) silk textured left, must 12 years old by now, bought it when B&H carried a wide range of Slavich papers, I used it for portraits, had only 1 packet of 25 sheets. My Kodak data guide from the 60s lists Y as silk but K seems to have more texture. I liked V, was sad when all of the textured matt papers were discontinued as commercial work shifted to color.

I think you mean Slavich. As far as I recall it used to be made in Russia. Do Ilford not make a silk surfaced paper with their MG5 resin coated

The only /best use of silk finished prints for me was on high end studio B&W portraits with a soft focus effect.

 

[foc]

Probably a feeble attempt to mask the awful grain and lack of sharpness.

Yes I would agree.

Silk prints were also good for striking a match off.

 

[AZD]

Remember back in the 70's after the 110 Instamatics were popular and all the drug store labs gave "borderless silk" prints? Probably a feeble attempt to mask the awful grain and lack of sharpness. Looked terrible. I never liked "silk" prints ever since, and probably because of that.

Yes, this must be the reason I saw some color prints with textured surface. I never saw my father use anything besides a 110 camera.

It does kill sharpness (or whatever there was to begin with), but it also made the prints easier to handle. Maybe not a 1:1 trade off, but interesting.

Around this time, I think, the silk texture papers sorta went out of style, which I think may be related. Or maybe not. I would say that the Kodak 'E' surface finish sorta become the de facto standard for such work.

Interesting, I hadn’t heard the back story on copying prints. Seems almost quaint in our time, but was no doubt serious business. The Portralure I found is from the very early 70s. It’s not mentioned, nor is any Y surface paper, in a 1980 darkroom data guide I have.

Color RA4 paper still comes in this finish. It's not for me.

Huh, didn’t know that. I haven’t had an RA4 print made in a long time.