Digital BW, The Print

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Tyler Boley" 
<tyler@...> wrote:
>
> sorry guys, we're just not remotely talking about the same thing. 
One is not a limited 
> version of the other, they are two different things. This suggests 
that an excellent 
> platinum print that really brings that process alive, can be 
equaled with a silver print by 
> simpley limiting the density range to the platinum's.
> They have completely different impressions.
> Sorry, dynamic range for some of us is not the game. It's just a 
tool that can be used well, 
> or not.
> And I don't run my fingers across anyone's prints, or watercolors, 
or sketches...
> A beautiful print is a beautiful print, whatever it is on, whatever 
it's density range, I still 
> don't get it.
> Tyler


Well, Dmax is not always the ultimate quest, I'd agree with this. 
Meanwhile, fragility of the surface is an issue, even though you 
don't go and scratch it on purpose. IFPG is a fragile surface 
specially in B&W printing : I can clearly see the printer wheel marks 
left in dark areas, and the glossy surface does not help hidding it.

I've seen prints side by side of IFBG, CSR and HM FAP : these papers 
are very different in media white, surface, stiffness, texture... 
After some thoughts I'd not go for CSR for it is very "yellow", stiff 
and close to a semimatte paper compared to the 2 others. That's very 
personal though. Visual Dmax between the 3 is to me very similar to 
say the least, media white and texture confuse the eye, so I was not 
able to say which has thes best, so Dmax at that level becomes a 
matter of personal perception imo.

Olivier