Digital BW, The Print

Steve Kale wrote:
> I am curious.  I do not have a wetroom background.  How would one describe the difference 
> in texture between a traditional fibre print and, say, Epson Premium Luster.  Ignore ink for 
> the moment - just the comparison of two sheets of blank white paper.  On a scale of 1 to 10 
> are we at 2 (nowhere near the goal) or at, say, an 8 (close but no cigar)?  Of course this is 
> very subjective and perhaps I should go to a Lab and ask for a blank fibre print so that I can 
> form my own opinion but I am wondering whether we collectively/generally think we are 
> close or miles away.

IMHO, and I'm sure this is a near-religious issue, we're comparing the 
wrong things. Premium Luster is basically matte surface RC paper. IMO, 
EEM is closer to an air-dried fiber print than anything else.

Premium glossy is a *very* good answer to RC glossy papers, and all of 
the Ilford papers are very much like their Ilfochrome (Cibachrome) 
counterpart.

But, does print "feel" matter? Once something is mounted, it's only the 
surface that matters, and if you've ever ferrotyped a glossy FB print, 
the resulting surface is quite close to the glossy papers from Epson or 
Ilford.