Glossy vs. Matte Dynamics
2005-08-22 by claudej1@aol.com
In a message dated 8/22/2005 4:34:59 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com writes: For normal humans the matt surface gives much better natural feeling, the 3D illusion is not destroyed by glossy reflections. One joky sample - try print something as Boston's muzeum (glossy metal tower) with the sky - you may print it on matt paper but on glossy you never receive the contrast between "matte" sky and glossy building. ;-) Martin The problem you describe is not so much about the surface of the paper, but rather, the lighting and viewing environment. I have been a PPA/WPPI print judge at national and state competitions. What cracks up about the mentality of portrait photographers is that it's "bad" to sell portrait/wedding clients prints on glossy paper, but E surface (Luster, Semigloss) or N surface (semi matte) is OK. YET, all of the competition prints are either glossy laminates or have multilayers of Diamond Gloss lacquer applied to them. They are also printed much darker than normal. WHY? Because under twin spotlights used for viewing (especially viewed by the non-judging audience in a darkened room) these prints look like 16x20 backlit transparencies. The minute some "artsy" rebel decides to put up a print on matte paper, it looks dull and lifeless in comparison to the rest. I can attest to this as I typically view 1,500 images in 2 grueling 8-hour days.(we are talking mostly color here, the B&W matte looks good, but not right after a full scale glossy B&W). Fortunately most judges look the merit and impact of the image not the surface. The notable exceptions are the digital "watercolor" paintings that push pixels around with computer "brushes." I have printed several of these on the super-thick (550 gsm) Epson Velvet paper and there is no "Dmax" anywhere in the file, so you can use PK for matte papers just fine. In B&W it's a whole different thing altogether because we cannot SEE in shades of gray in the real 3-d world. Therefore B&W is INHERENTLY abstract, so anything goes for that market, thankfully. Claude PS: I don't miss the days of wasted time and paper with a 10-minute per print expose/develop/stop/fix/fix cycle, then tone the heroes in super-toxic selenium followed by a 90 minute wash cycle in an overpriced aquarium with overnight drying. I can make more money and save more time with inkjet output. What an inefficient way to work that was. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]