Digital BW, The Print

Clarence,
It may take a re-read to grasp what Jon had written.  Non-matte has a
greater tonal range than matte, so his point may have been finer than the
obvious.
Other than personal taste, I think lighting has a huge affect on what looks
best.  Controlled gallery lighting makes gloss surfaces look exceptional,
while uncontrolled lighting can make those images almost un-viewable.  There
must be some galleries in Atlanta with inkjet prints that you can visit?
There are so many choices and future promises now, making it extremely
difficult to home in on one’s own aspiration.

Best regards,
John Moody

-----Original Message-----
From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Clarence
Walker
Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2006 9:36 AM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Digital BW] Matte versus gloss papers for tone

In reading an article containing the thoughts of Jon Cone it was mentioned
that while matte papers excel in their ability to reproduce tones and depth,
none of the non-matte papers receive the ink as well and do not have the
same quality. Previously, I had thought that the opposite was true, and that
matte papers wouldn't have the depth and tonal range and depth. Do I need to
reverse my understanding? In having to choose between inks and papers to
achieve depth and tone, are the matte papers superior?

Clarence W. Walker,




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]