Digital BW, The Print

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/new/index.shtml

The Luminous-Landscape comparison of the three papers.  Any comments as to Dmax and 
etc?

Martin

Based on many comments by others I think the DMax for Silver Rag is low. I now have a roll so I will make my own measurements and report my findings

Woody Spedden

----- Original Message ----
From: mxgo95747 <mxgo95747@...>
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, June 8, 2006 2:50:21 PM
Subject: [Digital BW] Silver Rag, Hahnemuehle, and Innova Fiba Gloss Comparison

                           http://www.luminous -landscape. com/new/index. shtml
 
 The Luminous-Landscape comparison of the three papers.  Any comments as to Dmax and 
 etc?
 
 Martin
 
 
     
                       




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

Agreed I find all of them low..

 

Jim Doyle

 

J. Doyle Enterprises LLC

114 Old Orchard Rd

Cherry Hill NJ 08003

856-424-8660

HYPERLINK "http://www.shadesofpaper.com"www.shadesofpaper.com

 

   _____  

From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
elwood@...
Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 5:20 PM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Silver Rag, Hahnemuehle, and Innova Fiba Gloss
Comparison

 

Based on many comments by others I think the DMax for Silver Rag is low. I
now have a roll so I will make my own measurements and report my findings

Woody Spedden

----- Original Message ----
From: mxgo95747 <HYPERLINK
"mailto:mxgo95747%40yahoo.com"mxgo95747@yahoo.-com>
To: HYPERLINK
"mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint%40yahoogroups.com"DigitalBlackandWhit-e
ThePrint@-yahoogroups.-com
Sent: Thursday, June 8, 2006 2:50:21 PM
Subject: [Digital BW] Silver Rag, Hahnemuehle, and Innova Fiba Gloss
Comparison

HYPERLINK "http://www.luminous"http://www.luminous -landscape.
com/new/index. shtml

The Luminous-Landscape comparison of the three papers. Any comments as to
Dmax and 
etc?

Martin





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

 


--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.3/358 - Release Date: 6/7/2006



-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.3/358 - Release Date: 6/7/2006
 


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

I agree with the luminous-landscape review that the Innova Fiba Gloss
F is a cool, meaning on the blue side, paper.  I also agree that it is
in many ways very likable.  I've yet to get any Silver Rag or FAP.

Ed

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "mxgo95747"
<mxgo95747@...> wrote:
>
> http://www.luminous-landscape.com/new/index.shtml
> 
> The Luminous-Landscape comparison of the three papers.  Any comments
as to Dmax and 

> etc?
> 
> Martin
>

Jim,

Just for my own benefit, you find the dmax low compared to what?  

Thanks, 

Brian
http://www.brianchapmanphotography.com

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Jim Doyle" 
<jdoyle1713@...> wrote:
>
> Agreed I find all of them low..
> 
>  
> 
> Jim Doyle
> 
>  
> 
> J. Doyle Enterprises LLC
> 
> 114 Old Orchard Rd
> 
> Cherry Hill NJ 08003
> 
> 856-424-8660
> 
> HYPERLINK "http://www.shadesofpaper.com"www.shadesofpaper.com
> 
>  
> 
>    _____  
> 
> From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
> elwood@...
> Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 5:20 PM
> To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Silver Rag, Hahnemuehle, and Innova Fiba 
Gloss
> Comparison
> 
>  
> 
> Based on many comments by others I think the DMax for Silver Rag 
is low. I
> now have a roll so I will make my own measurements and report my 
findings
> 
> Woody Spedden
> 
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: mxgo95747 <HYPERLINK
> "mailto:mxgo95747%40yahoo.com"mxgo95747@...>
> To: HYPERLINK
> "mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint%
40yahoogroups.com"DigitalBlackandWhit-e
> ThePrint@...
> Sent: Thursday, June 8, 2006 2:50:21 PM
> Subject: [Digital BW] Silver Rag, Hahnemuehle, and Innova Fiba 
Gloss
> Comparison
> 
> HYPERLINK "http://www.luminous"http://www.luminous -landscape.
> com/new/index. shtml
> 
> The Luminous-Landscape comparison of the three papers. Any 
comments as to
> Dmax and 
> etc?
> 
> Martin
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> 
>  
> 
> 
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.3/358 - Release Date: 
6/7/2006
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.3/358 - Release Date: 
6/7/2006

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

All Three Papers I Have readings for all are over 2. with PK ink on the
Epson..I�ll dig up the exact numbers if you want..

 

 

 

Jim Doyle

 

J. Doyle Enterprises LLC

114 Old Orchard Rd

Cherry Hill NJ 08003

856-424-8660

HYPERLINK "http://www.shadesofpaper.com"www.shadesofpaper.com

 

   _____  

From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Brian
Chapman
Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 6:57 PM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Silver Rag, Hahnemuehle, and Innova Fiba Gloss
Comparison

 

Jim,

Just for my own benefit, you find the dmax low compared to what? 

Thanks, 

Brian
HYPERLINK
"http://www.brianchapmanphotography.com"http://www.briancha-pmanphotography.
-com

--- In HYPERLINK
"mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint%40yahoogroups.com"DigitalBlackandWhit-e
ThePrint@-yahoogroups.-com, "Jim Doyle" 
<jdoyle1713@-...> wrote:
>
> Agreed I find all of them low..
> 
> 
> 
> Jim Doyle
> 
> 
> 
> J. Doyle Enterprises LLC
> 
> 114 Old Orchard Rd
> 
> Cherry Hill NJ 08003
> 
> 856-424-8660
> 
> HYPERLINK "HYPERLINK
"http://www.shadesofpaper.com"http://www.shadesof-paper.com"www.shadesofpape
r.-com
> 
> 
> 
> _____ 
> 
> From: HYPERLINK
"mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint%40yahoogroups.com"DigitalBlackandWhit-e
ThePrint@-yahoogroups.-com
> [mailto:HYPERLINK
"mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint%40yahoogroups.com"DigitalBlackandWhit-e
ThePrint@-yahoogroups.-com] On Behalf Of
> elwood@...
> Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 5:20 PM
> To: HYPERLINK
"mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint%40yahoogroups.com"DigitalBlackandWhit-e
ThePrint@-yahoogroups.-com
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Silver Rag, Hahnemuehle, and Innova Fiba 
Gloss
> Comparison
> 
> 
> 
> Based on many comments by others I think the DMax for Silver Rag 
is low. I
> now have a roll so I will make my own measurements and report my 
findings
> 
> Woody Spedden
> 
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: mxgo95747 <HYPERLINK
> "mailto:mxgo95747%-40yahoo.com"-mxgo95747@-...>
> To: HYPERLINK
> "mailto:DigitalBlac-kandWhiteThePrin-t%
40yahoogroups.-com"DigitalBlack-andWhit-e
> ThePrint@...
> Sent: Thursday, June 8, 2006 2:50:21 PM
> Subject: [Digital BW] Silver Rag, Hahnemuehle, and Innova Fiba 
Gloss
> Comparison
> 
> HYPERLINK "HYPERLINK "http://www.luminous"http://www.luminous"HYPERLINK
"http://www.luminous"http://www.luminous -landscape.
> com/new/index. shtml
> 
> The Luminous-Landscape comparison of the three papers. Any 
comments as to
> Dmax and 
> etc?
> 
> Martin
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.3/358 - Release Date: 
6/7/2006
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.3/358 - Release Date: 
6/7/2006
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

 


--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.3/358 - Release Date: 6/7/2006



-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.3/358 - Release Date: 6/7/2006
 


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

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "mxgo95747"
<mxgo95747@...> wrote:
>
> http://www.luminous-landscape.com/new/index.shtml
> 
> The Luminous-Landscape comparison of the three papers.  Any comments
as to Dmax and 

His dmax results are lower than my measurements, but this depends so
much on what driver or RIP was used and what associated settings may
have been used. In fact, a review which fails to mention any of that
is hard to take seriously IMHO.

> etc?

Surface description is not what I see here either. What he describes
sounds more like the mule pearl, the Innova has more more and varied
tooth. Likeable though.
Tyler

> 
> Martin
>

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Jim Doyle"
<jdoyle1713@...> wrote:
>
> All Three Papers I Have readings for all are over 2. with PK ink on the
> Epson..I'll dig up the exact numbers if you want..

I got it Jimmy, see message number 77639
Tyler

> Jim Doyle wrote:
> 
> All Three Papers I Have readings for all are over 2. with PK ink on the
> Epson..I'll dig up the exact numbers if you want..
> 

With UT-3D and the 2-grays black generation, using the Epson drivers I'm
getting in the 2.2-2.3 range with Crane Silver Rag and Innova F-Type.  

I don't consider a stable 2.2 dmax low.  It beats most of the old darkroom
prints, and it's very hard to see and the differences once one is in the 2.2
range or above.

Does anyone know if the Canon that achieved 2.5 uses dyes in the black ink?

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Tyler Boley" <tyler@...> wrote:
>
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "mxgo95747"
> <mxgo95747@> wrote:
> >
> > http://www.luminous-landscape.com/new/index.shtml
> > 
> > The Luminous-Landscape comparison of the three papers.  Any comments
> as to Dmax and 
> 
> His dmax results are lower than my measurements, but this depends so
> much on what driver or RIP was used and what associated settings may
> have been used. In fact, a review which fails to mention any of that
> is hard to take seriously IMHO.

Maybe Michael Reichmann read your post:

"To that end I made prints on an Epson 4800 using the Imageprint RIP and Phatte Black ink 
system, and also the brand new Canon iPF 5000 printer. Prints were evaluated under a 
Graphiclite PDV-3D D50 viewing station. A Gretag Macbeth iOne spectrophotometer along 
with Babelcolor software was used for technical measurements. Other photographers were 
called in (and dropped in), and their opinions were figured into the mix."

Low dmax...could be that crappy "RIP" he's using! ;-}

I just read a ramp made with InkJetControl using the Light Black on my Epson 4800. Dmax 
is 2.10. (With Matte Black installed IJC will print B+W on glossy paper using Light Black, 
Light Light Black and any of the color inks if needed for toning.)

I used PrintFIX Pro to read dmax.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Tyler Boley" <tyler@...> wrote:
>
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Jim Doyle"
> <jdoyle1713@> wrote:
> >
> > All Three Papers I Have readings for all are over 2. with PK ink on the
> > Epson..I'll dig up the exact numbers if you want..
> 
> I got it Jimmy, see message number 77639


More, for what it's worth.
Max densities, 9800, RIP, PK

SilverRag- C) 2.389 M) 1.942 Y) 1.681 K) 2.294
FibaPrintGloss C) 2.374 M) 1.943 Y) 1.797 K) 2.401
HahnemühlePearl- C) 2.413 M) 1.96 Y) 1.832 K) 2.257

(paper density removed, unlimited)

All pretty close really, curious that the H paper gets higher color
density but lower K.
After seeing some images on the Pearl, to me the very fine stipple
texture is apparent compared to the other two, but the Innova has
"larger" texture.
More to come, I'll just keep yacking...
Tyler
www.custom-digital.com

--------
I have tried the FibaPrint Gloss and not having tried the other two papers, I just wanted see 
if the differences in Dmax (between 2.25 and 2.94) can be visually seen.

Thanks,

Martin

Paul,

With proper control of OEM K3 PK ink limits, ~2.5 can be achieved on 
Silver Rag and Fiba Gloss (Don't know about Hahn PFA) without 
resorting to dyes. My experiemnts with QTR on 2400 and 4000 loaded 
with K3 PK confirm this.

Shilesh



--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark" 
<paul.roark@...> wrote:
>
> 
> 
> > Jim Doyle wrote:
> > 
> > All Three Papers I Have readings for all are over 2. with PK ink 
on the
> > Epson..I'll dig up the exact numbers if you want..
> > 
> 
> With UT-3D and the 2-grays black generation, using the Epson 
drivers I'm
> getting in the 2.2-2.3 range with Crane Silver Rag and Innova F-
Type.  
> 
> I don't consider a stable 2.2 dmax low.  It beats most of the old 
darkroom
> prints, and it's very hard to see and the differences once one is 
in the 2.2
> range or above.
> 
> Does anyone know if the Canon that achieved 2.5 uses dyes in the 
black ink?

> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com
>

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "mxgo95747"
<mxgo95747@...> wrote:
...
> --------
> I have tried the FibaPrint Gloss and not having tried the other two
papers, I just wanted see 
> if the differences in Dmax (between 2.25 and 2.94) can be visually seen.

Wow! 2.94!!! Sorry, probably meant 2.294...
Anyway, these differences may possibly be seen by someone with nothing
better to do than peer at them endlessly with no important criteria
other than dmax, but I'd say it's negligible to invisible.
In fact, a few of us here had some SilverRag, FibaPrint Gloss, Fine
Art Pearl, air dried fiber selenium toned silver, and quads on coated
art papers all spread out here the other day.

Guess which took the subjective edge in richness?
That's right, the lowly 1.7 dmax quad inks on William Turner prints.
Additionally, the blacks "felt" as black as the others.
Also, for non-matte, the silver print still shines above the others in
surface quality and absolute impression of continuous tone.
We are probably biased, and it was obviously very subjective, but the
point is dmax is far from the top of the list for print quality, and
even being able to tell the differences between these dmax's is a stretch.
Of course, if that's all you're looking for when looking at prints,
perhaps you'll perceive it. Of those papers, the surface and paper
base hue are far more important for choosing.
Tyler

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Tyler Boley" <tyler@...> wrote:
>
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "mxgo95747"
> <mxgo95747@> wrote:
> ...
> > --------
> > I have tried the FibaPrint Gloss and not having tried the other two
> papers, I just wanted see 
> > if the differences in Dmax (between 2.25 and 2.94) can be visually seen.

> 
> Wow! 2.94!!! Sorry, probably meant 2.294...

Did I screw that up, it should be 2.401 ( from your message: FibaPrintGloss C) 2.374 M) 
1.943 Y) 1.797 K) 2.401).  

> 
> Guess which took the subjective edge in richness?
> That's right, the lowly 1.7 dmax quad inks on William Turner prints.
> Additionally, the blacks "felt" as black as the others.
> Also, for non-matte, the silver print still shines above the others in
> surface quality and absolute impression of continuous tone.
> We are probably biased, and it was obviously very subjective, but the
> point is dmax is far from the top of the list for print quality, and
> even being able to tell the differences between these dmax's is a stretch.
> Of course, if that's all you're looking for when looking at prints,
> perhaps you'll perceive it. Of those papers, the surface and paper
> base hue are far more important for choosing.

Thanks, that is the input that I was looking for.  I will compare the three when the Crane 
and Hahnemuehle papers, when Jim Doyle gets 8.5" by 11" sheets.  Then compare all three 
against the matte papers.  By the way richness, among other qualities, was included in the 
"etc." in my post.

Every once in while, I have to be reminded that Dmax is not every thing.  Maybe, I should 
look up at the Epson Velvet Fine Art paper prints that I have in framed and under glass in 
my study, where my typing this message.  I do like the "look."

Martin

> ... a few of us here had some SilverRag, FibaPrint Gloss, 
> Fine Art Pearl, air dried fiber selenium toned silver, and 
> quads on coated art papers all spread out here the other day.

> Guess which took the subjective edge in richness?
> That's right, the lowly 1.7 dmax quad inks on William Turner prints.

I've also noticed that with such prints spread out on my desk, but in better
display and lighting conditions the 2.2 dmax black makes the 1.7 look gray.
Luckily most display conditions are bad enough that I'll be able to use my
matte paper for most printing.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

I got my first box of the FibaPrint Gloss a couple days ago and in 
comparing the same sample images visually with the other papers I've 
been using (photo rag, william turner, german etching) it definately 
has higher dmax.  

However, when viewed individually, where there isn't a comparison 
print with higher dmax, the most important factor is what the viewer 
perceives as black in the image.  Before I compared them (PR and 
FibaPrint Gloss) side by side, I was pretty convinced that what I 
was looking at on PR was deep black.  Obviously the FibaPrint Gloss 
paper changed my perception in comparison but when I look at the 
prints individually I still feel like I'm looking at black in the PR 
print.  

I'm not trying to turn this in to a matte vs glossy debate so I'll 
leave it there ;)

Brian
http://www.brianchapmanphotography.com


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark" 
<paul.roark@...> wrote:
>
> 
> > ... a few of us here had some SilverRag, FibaPrint Gloss, 
> > Fine Art Pearl, air dried fiber selenium toned silver, and 
> > quads on coated art papers all spread out here the other day.
> 
> > Guess which took the subjective edge in richness?
> > That's right, the lowly 1.7 dmax quad inks on William Turner 
prints.
> 
> I've also noticed that with such prints spread out on my desk, but 
in better
> display and lighting conditions the 2.2 dmax black makes the 1.7 
look gray.
> Luckily most display conditions are bad enough that I'll be able 
to use my

> matte paper for most printing.
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com
>

I think this also has a lot to do with image tonality. Certainly
something like a still life on a black background or anything with
areas of solid K are going to definitely appear different, no
question. The prints we were comparing were clearly printed with a
high emphasis on the middle tones sitting just right, and detail
everywhere. This means only very small areas of full dmax. 
I also was not attempting to re-introduce the tired matte vrs glossy
issue, just describing an interesting experience with an unexpected
outcome.
I've heard from 3 or 4 big name (very) west coast silver printer
photographers that they "hate" platinum prints, the density range is
"inferior". Too bad, some of the most beautiful prints I've ever seen
are platinum, some of the deadest flat prints I've seen are platinum.
Some of the most beautiful prints I've seen are silver, some of the
harshest ugly prints I've seen are silver. I don't get the dogma, I
just don't get it. You'd think these people would know how to look at art.
Also, I've said it before, I didn't say the Turner blacks appeared as
dark as the gloss placks, I said the Turner prints were richer in
impression, and the blacks "felt" as black.
I realize some will have a lot of trouble with that kind of talk, all
I can say is that these decisions are the individual artist's and
these kinds of comparisions, with real prints not numbers, have to be
done by those interested in nailing down a personal materials preference.
Tyler

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Brian Chapman"
<brianechapman@...> wrote:

>
> I got my first box of the FibaPrint Gloss a couple days ago and in 
> comparing the same sample images visually with the other papers I've 
> been using (photo rag, william turner, german etching) it definately 
> has higher dmax.  
> 
> However, when viewed individually, where there isn't a comparison 
> print with higher dmax, the most important factor is what the viewer 
> perceives as black in the image.  Before I compared them (PR and 
> FibaPrint Gloss) side by side, I was pretty convinced that what I 
> was looking at on PR was deep black.  Obviously the FibaPrint Gloss 
> paper changed my perception in comparison but when I look at the 
> prints individually I still feel like I'm looking at black in the PR 
> print.  
> 
> I'm not trying to turn this in to a matte vs glossy debate so I'll 
> leave it there ;)
> 
> Brian
> http://www.brianchapmanphotography.com
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark" 
> <paul.roark@> wrote:
> >
> > 
> > > ... a few of us here had some SilverRag, FibaPrint Gloss, 
> > > Fine Art Pearl, air dried fiber selenium toned silver, and 
> > > quads on coated art papers all spread out here the other day.
> > 
> > > Guess which took the subjective edge in richness?
> > > That's right, the lowly 1.7 dmax quad inks on William Turner 
> prints.
> > 
> > I've also noticed that with such prints spread out on my desk, but 
> in better
> > display and lighting conditions the 2.2 dmax black makes the 1.7 
> look gray.
> > Luckily most display conditions are bad enough that I'll be able 
> to use my
> > matte paper for most printing.
> > 
> > Paul
> > www.PaulRoark.com
> >
>

My own impressions pretty much mirror that. There seems to be a
breaking point at about that d'max level (high 1.6s--low 1.7s) where
IMO the velvety look of some of the matt papers is just beautiful. Now
the problem is not the look but rather how to safely display it.

Regards
Duane



> Wow! 2.94!!! Sorry, probably meant 2.294...
> Anyway, these differences may possibly be seen by someone with nothing
> better to do than peer at them endlessly with no important criteria
> other than dmax, but I'd say it's negligible to invisible.
> In fact, a few of us here had some SilverRag, FibaPrint Gloss, Fine
> Art Pearl, air dried fiber selenium toned silver, and quads on coated
> art papers all spread out here the other day.
> 
> Guess which took the subjective edge in richness?
> That's right, the lowly 1.7 dmax quad inks on William Turner prints.
> Additionally, the blacks "felt" as black as the others.
> Also, for non-matte, the silver print still shines above the others in
> surface quality and absolute impression of continuous tone.
> We are probably biased, and it was obviously very subjective, but the
> point is dmax is far from the top of the list for print quality, and
> even being able to tell the differences between these dmax's is a
stretch.

> Of course, if that's all you're looking for when looking at prints,
> perhaps you'll perceive it. Of those papers, the surface and paper
> base hue are far more important for choosing.
> Tyler
>

Hey Tyler,

As you said, a large part of it is developing a personal materials 
preference.  For many of *my* images, [today] I prefer the matte 
papers for various reasons.  There are others that I have not 
printed yet that I'm sure will not work as well on the matte papers 
(although as Clayton said there are plenty of surprises to be had).  
I should add that I don't have enough printing experience to be any 
kind of authority on the subject. 

This is a good summary of what I think matters more than is normally 
considered..."I said the Turner prints were richer in impression, 
and the blacks "felt" as black".
   
Brian
http://www.brianchapmanphotography.com

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Tyler Boley" 
<tyler@...> wrote:
>
> I think this also has a lot to do with image tonality. Certainly
> something like a still life on a black background or anything with
> areas of solid K are going to definitely appear different, no
> question. The prints we were comparing were clearly printed with a
> high emphasis on the middle tones sitting just right, and detail
> everywhere. This means only very small areas of full dmax. 
> I also was not attempting to re-introduce the tired matte vrs 
glossy
> issue, just describing an interesting experience with an unexpected
> outcome.
> I've heard from 3 or 4 big name (very) west coast silver printer
> photographers that they "hate" platinum prints, the density range 
is
> "inferior". Too bad, some of the most beautiful prints I've ever 
seen
> are platinum, some of the deadest flat prints I've seen are 
platinum.
> Some of the most beautiful prints I've seen are silver, some of the
> harshest ugly prints I've seen are silver. I don't get the dogma, I
> just don't get it. You'd think these people would know how to look 
at art.
> Also, I've said it before, I didn't say the Turner blacks appeared 
as
> dark as the gloss placks, I said the Turner prints were richer in
> impression, and the blacks "felt" as black.
> I realize some will have a lot of trouble with that kind of talk, 
all
> I can say is that these decisions are the individual artist's and
> these kinds of comparisions, with real prints not numbers, have to 
be
> done by those interested in nailing down a personal materials 
preference.
> Tyler
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Brian 
Chapman"
> <brianechapman@> wrote:
> >
> > I got my first box of the FibaPrint Gloss a couple days ago and 
in 
> > comparing the same sample images visually with the other papers 
I've 
> > been using (photo rag, william turner, german etching) it 
definately 
> > has higher dmax.  
> > 
> > However, when viewed individually, where there isn't a 
comparison 
> > print with higher dmax, the most important factor is what the 
viewer 
> > perceives as black in the image.  Before I compared them (PR and 
> > FibaPrint Gloss) side by side, I was pretty convinced that what 
I 
> > was looking at on PR was deep black.  Obviously the FibaPrint 
Gloss 
> > paper changed my perception in comparison but when I look at the 
> > prints individually I still feel like I'm looking at black in 
the PR 
> > print.  
> > 
> > I'm not trying to turn this in to a matte vs glossy debate so 
I'll 
> > leave it there ;)
> > 
> > Brian
> > http://www.brianchapmanphotography.com
> > 
> > 
> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul 
Roark" 
> > <paul.roark@> wrote:
> > >
> > > 
> > > > ... a few of us here had some SilverRag, FibaPrint Gloss, 
> > > > Fine Art Pearl, air dried fiber selenium toned silver, and 
> > > > quads on coated art papers all spread out here the other day.
> > > 
> > > > Guess which took the subjective edge in richness?
> > > > That's right, the lowly 1.7 dmax quad inks on William Turner 
> > prints.
> > > 
> > > I've also noticed that with such prints spread out on my desk, 
but 
> > in better
> > > display and lighting conditions the 2.2 dmax black makes the 
1.7 
> > look gray.
> > > Luckily most display conditions are bad enough that I'll be 
able 

> > to use my
> > > matte paper for most printing.
> > > 
> > > Paul
> > > www.PaulRoark.com
> > >
> >
>

Hello Tyler,

>...these kinds of comparisions, with real prints not numbers, 
>have to be done by those interested in nailing down a personal 
>materials preference.

Thank you, well said.  It's so easy to get caught up in the numbers
and think that's all that counts.  There's a whole 'nother world of
perception out there that often defies explanation, especially when it
comes to art.  

Take, for example, the recent work of Sally Mann, who is one of
today's most acclaimed photographic artists

"Mann has won numerous awards, including Guggenheim and National
Endowment for the Arts fellowships. Her photographs are in the
permanent collections of many museums, including The Museum of Modern
Art and the Whitney Museum of American Art in New York, and the
Smithsonian American Art Museum in Washington, D.C."

Her current Deep South photos are bringing wide acclaim, yet they are
the very antithesis of everything we attribute to AA and the western
landscape school:  often underexposed, out of focus, extreme
vignetting, corner softness, light leak streaks, or any combination of
these.  Yet, they convey a powerful emotional intensity.  Here's a
quote of her answering a question about her equipment:

"Well, you know I told you that none of my equipment has ever been any
good, I certainly could go out and buy a good, tack-sharp lens that
would take the perfect picture that's in focus from end to end. But
instead, I spend an awful lot of time at that antique mall looking
around for these lenses with just the right amount of decrepitude. The
glue has to be peeling off of the lens elements, it's great if its
mildewed and out of whack—a lens is made up of several different
pieces of glass which are supposed to stay glued in the right
relationship with each other—but my most prized lens has one of the
pieces of glass askew, so when the light comes in it it's refulgent.
It just bounces all around and does this great sort of luminescent
thing on the glass. You can tell a good ruined lens right from the
get-go....they are the ones you find in the trash cans of old photo
studios, in some ghost town in Iowa. I mean, that's the kind of lens
I'm looking for."

Some incredibly beautiful landscapes are grainy, soft focus and low
dmax (often platinum).  There is more to this than numbers.

Regards,
Clayton


Info on black and white digital printing at    
http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm

>
> Thank you, well said.  It's so easy to get caught up in the numbers
> and think that's all that counts.  There's a whole 'nother world of
> perception out there that often defies explanation, especially when it
> comes to art.  
>
> Take, for example, the recent work of Sally Mann, who is one of
> today's most acclaimed photographic artists
>
> "Mann has won numerous awards, including Guggenheim and National
> Endowment for the Arts fellowships. Her photographs are in the
> permanent collections of many museums, including The Museum of Modern
> Art and the Whitney Museum of American Art in New York, and the
> Smithsonian American Art Museum in Washington, D.C."
>
> Her current Deep South photos are bringing wide acclaim, yet they are
> the very antithesis of everything we attribute to AA and the western
> landscape school:  often underexposed, out of focus, extreme
> vignetting, corner softness, light leak streaks, or any combination of
> these.  Yet, they convey a powerful emotional intensity.  Here's a
> quote of her answering a question about her equipment:
>
> "Well, you know I told you that none of my equipment has ever been any
> good, I certainly could go out and buy a good, tack-sharp lens that
> would take the perfect picture that's in focus from end to end. But
> instead, I spend an awful lot of time at that antique mall looking
> around for these lenses with just the right amount of decrepitude. The
> glue has to be peeling off of the lens elements, it's great if its
> mildewed and out of whack\ufffda lens is made up of several different
> pieces of glass which are supposed to stay glued in the right
> relationship with each other\ufffdbut my most prized lens has one of the
> pieces of glass askew, so when the light comes in it it's refulgent.
> It just bounces all around and does this great sort of luminescent
> thing on the glass. You can tell a good ruined lens right from the
> get-go....they are the ones you find in the trash cans of old photo
> studios, in some ghost town in Iowa. I mean, that's the kind of lens
> I'm looking for."
>
> Some incredibly beautiful landscapes are grainy, soft focus and low
> dmax (often platinum).  There is more to this than numbers.
>
> Regards,
> Clayton
>
>
> Info on black and white digital printing at    
> http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm
>
>
>   


A very good point, Clayton. I have often said that Cartier-Bresson, who 
was known as Mr. Leica, could as well have been using a Brownie Hawkeye. 
And in that world, in the context of those incredibly compelling 
photographs, Photoshop is virtually meaningless. The power of the images 
transcended the technique. Which, I think, leads to a very important 
question that all of us who pursue fine art photography should ask: at 
what point do we become trapped by the technology.

Cheers,

Rem

Shilesh,

>With proper control of OEM K3 PK ink limits, ~2.5 can be 
>achieved on Silver Rag and Fiba Gloss ...

Yes, I've been able to get to that range with Epson UC inks also.  I think
the coated PK has an advantage in terms of the ultimate dmax.  I thought
that Epson had some patent or other protection on its pigment coating.  I
wonder if Canon pigments are coated.

The MIS uncoated PK on the RC type glossy papers tends to lose some dmax as
it dries down slowly over the first few days.   However, a spray would
sometimes kick the dmax up to the Epson UC level on these older RC papers.

The new technology papers seem to be different in this regard.  They don't
lose as much dmax, but they never get as much or benefit as much from
spraying either.  I tried an Innova F-Type with a spray today.  It raised
the UT-3D dmax from 2.22 to 2.26.  Visually the print looks almost identical
to the pre-sprayed version.  It did reduce the already very low bronzing to
nil. 

The difference may be that the new glossy fiber-based papers are not
"barrier" papers.  As such, they may simply pass the glycols on to the
cellulose base.  The cellulose could then simply hold these as is done in
the matte papers.  

The slow evaporation of the glycols and related chemicals off the surface of
RC papers was apparently responsible for the fogging of the glass if RC
prints were framed too quickly.  I have not heard whether the new glossy
fiber-based papers are affected by this issue.


Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

Jim....Do you have numbers for Lexjet product.....I see they have released a product of the same type???

Jim Doyle <jdoyle1713@...> wrote:  All Three Papers I Have readings for all are over 2. with PK ink on the
Epson..I’ll dig up the exact numbers if you want..







Jim Doyle



J. Doyle Enterprises LLC

114 Old Orchard Rd

Cherry Hill NJ 08003

856-424-8660

HYPERLINK "http://www.shadesofpaper.com"www.shadesofpaper.com



_____ 

From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Brian
Chapman
Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 6:57 PM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Silver Rag, Hahnemuehle, and Innova Fiba Gloss
Comparison



Jim,

Just for my own benefit, you find the dmax low compared to what? 

Thanks, 

Brian
HYPERLINK
"http://www.brianchapmanphotography.com"http://www.briancha-pmanphotography.
-com

--- In HYPERLINK
"mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint%40yahoogroups.com"DigitalBlackandWhit-e
ThePrint@-yahoogroups.-com, "Jim Doyle" 
wrote:
>
> Agreed I find all of them low..
> 
> 
> 
> Jim Doyle
> 
> 
> 
> J. Doyle Enterprises LLC
> 
> 114 Old Orchard Rd
> 
> Cherry Hill NJ 08003
> 
> 856-424-8660
> 
> HYPERLINK "HYPERLINK
"http://www.shadesofpaper.com"http://www.shadesof-paper.com"www.shadesofpape
r.-com
> 
> 
> 
> _____ 
> 
> From: HYPERLINK
"mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint%40yahoogroups.com"DigitalBlackandWhit-e
ThePrint@-yahoogroups.-com
> [mailto:HYPERLINK
"mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint%40yahoogroups.com"DigitalBlackandWhit-e
ThePrint@-yahoogroups.-com] On Behalf Of
> elwood@...
> Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 5:20 PM
> To: HYPERLINK
"mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint%40yahoogroups.com"DigitalBlackandWhit-e
ThePrint@-yahoogroups.-com
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Silver Rag, Hahnemuehle, and Innova Fiba 
Gloss
> Comparison
> 
> 
> 
> Based on many comments by others I think the DMax for Silver Rag 
is low. I
> now have a roll so I will make my own measurements and report my 
findings
> 
> Woody Spedden
> 
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: mxgo95747 > "mailto:mxgo95747%-40yahoo.com"-mxgo95747@-...>
> To: HYPERLINK
> "mailto:DigitalBlac-kandWhiteThePrin-t%
40yahoogroups.-com"DigitalBlack-andWhit-e
> ThePrint@...
> Sent: Thursday, June 8, 2006 2:50:21 PM
> Subject: [Digital BW] Silver Rag, Hahnemuehle, and Innova Fiba 
Gloss
> Comparison
> 
> HYPERLINK "HYPERLINK "http://www.luminous"http://www.luminous"HYPERLINK
"http://www.luminous"http://www.luminous -landscape.
> com/new/index. shtml
> 
> The Luminous-Landscape comparison of the three papers. Any 
comments as to
> Dmax and 
> etc?
> 
> Martin
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.3/358 - Release Date: 
6/7/2006
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.3/358 - Release Date: 
6/7/2006
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>




--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.3/358 - Release Date: 6/7/2006



-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.3/358 - Release Date: 6/7/2006



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




Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other resources as they are often being updated.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint

If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same page.

Please follow these basic guidelines:
- As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep them short.
- Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames. Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from the membership without notice.
- Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital B&W printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be removed from the membership.
- By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group Owner and Moderators. See “Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines” in the Files section:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/

BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE “OWNER” AND “MODERATORS” OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS, GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF THE “OWNER” AND “MODERATORS” OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE INABILITY TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP.

Yahoo! Groups Links








 __________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

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

Well�HMMM�I wonder which one it could be?

 

Jim Doyle

 

J. Doyle Enterprises LLC

114 Old Orchard Rd

Cherry Hill NJ 08003

856-424-8660

HYPERLINK "http://www.shadesofpaper.com"www.shadesofpaper.com

 

   _____  

From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Max Dee
Sent: Friday, June 09, 2006 7:35 PM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Digital BW] Silver Rag, Hahnemuehle, and Innova Fiba Gloss
Comparison

 

Jim....Do you have numbers for Lexjet product.....-I see they have released
a product of the same type???

Jim Doyle <HYPERLINK
"mailto:jdoyle1713%40comcast.net"jdoyle1713@comcast.-net> wrote: All Three
Papers I Have readings for all are over 2. with PK ink on the
Epson..I�ll dig up the exact numbers if you want..

Jim Doyle

J. Doyle Enterprises LLC

114 Old Orchard Rd

Cherry Hill NJ 08003

856-424-8660

HYPERLINK "HYPERLINK
"http://www.shadesofpaper.com"http://www.shadesof-paper.com"www.shadesofpape
r.-com

_____ 

From: HYPERLINK
"mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint%40yahoogroups.com"DigitalBlackandWhit-e
ThePrint@-yahoogroups.-com
[mailto:HYPERLINK
"mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint%40yahoogroups.com"DigitalBlackandWhit-e
ThePrint@-yahoogroups.-com] On Behalf Of Brian
Chapman
Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 6:57 PM
To: HYPERLINK
"mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint%40yahoogroups.com"DigitalBlackandWhit-e
ThePrint@-yahoogroups.-com
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Silver Rag, Hahnemuehle, and Innova Fiba Gloss
Comparison

Jim,

Just for my own benefit, you find the dmax low compared to what? 

Thanks, 

Brian
HYPERLINK
"HYPERLINK
"http://www.brianchapmanphotography.com"http://www.briancha-pmanphotography.
-com"HYPERLINK
"http://www.briancha-pmanphotography."http://www.briancha--pmanphotography-.
-com

--- In HYPERLINK
"mailto:DigitalBlac-kandWhiteThePrin-t%40yahoogroups.-com"DigitalBlack-andWh
it-e
ThePrint@-yahoogrou-ps.-com, "Jim Doyle" 
wrote:
>
> Agreed I find all of them low..
> 
> 
> 
> Jim Doyle
> 
> 
> 
> J. Doyle Enterprises LLC
> 
> 114 Old Orchard Rd
> 
> Cherry Hill NJ 08003
> 
> 856-424-8660
> 
> HYPERLINK "HYPERLINK
"HYPERLINK
"http://www.shadesofpaper.com"http://www.shadesof-paper.com"HYPERLINK
"http://www.shadesof-paper.com"http://www.shadesof--paper.com"www.shadesofpa
pe
r.-com
> 
> 
> 
> _____ 
> 
> From: HYPERLINK
"mailto:DigitalBlac-kandWhiteThePrin-t%40yahoogroups.-com"DigitalBlack-andWh
it-e
ThePrint@-yahoogrou-ps.-com
> [mailto:HYPERLINK
"mailto:DigitalBlac-kandWhiteThePrin-t%40yahoogroups.-com"DigitalBlack-andWh
it-e
ThePrint@-yahoogrou-ps.-com] On Behalf Of
> elwood@...
> Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 5:20 PM
> To: HYPERLINK
"mailto:DigitalBlac-kandWhiteThePrin-t%40yahoogroups.-com"DigitalBlack-andWh
it-e
ThePrint@-yahoogrou-ps.-com
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Silver Rag, Hahnemuehle, and Innova Fiba 
Gloss
> Comparison
> 
> 
> 
> Based on many comments by others I think the DMax for Silver Rag 
is low. I
> now have a roll so I will make my own measurements and report my 
findings
> 
> Woody Spedden
> 
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: mxgo95747 > "mailto:mxgo95747%--40yahoo.-com"-mxgo95747@--...>
> To: HYPERLINK
> "mailto:DigitalBlac--kandWhiteThePri-n-t%
40yahoogroups.--com"DigitalBlac-k-andWhit--e
> ThePrint@...
> Sent: Thursday, June 8, 2006 2:50:21 PM
> Subject: [Digital BW] Silver Rag, Hahnemuehle, and Innova Fiba 
Gloss
> Comparison
> 
> HYPERLINK "HYPERLINK "HYPERLINK
"http://www.luminous"http://www.luminous"HYPERLINK
"http://www.luminous"http://www.luminous"HYPERLINK
"HYPERLINK "http://www.luminous"http://www.luminous"HYPERLINK
"http://www.luminous"http://www.luminous -landscape.
> com/new/index. shtml
> 
> The Luminous-Landscape comparison of the three papers. Any 
comments as to
> Dmax and 
> etc?
> 
> Martin
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.3/358 - Release Date: 
6/7/2006
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.3/358 - Release Date: 
6/7/2006
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.3/358 - Release Date: 6/7/2006

-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.3/358 - Release Date: 6/7/2006

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

Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other resources as
they are often being updated.

HYPERLINK
"http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint"http://groups.-y
ahoo.com/-group/DigitalBla-ckandWhiteThePri-nt

If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to
unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same
page.

Please follow these basic guidelines:
- As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep
them short.
- Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames.
Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from the
membership without notice.
- Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital B&W
printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be removed from
the membership.
- By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and
guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group Owner and
Moderators. See �Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines� in the Files section:
HYPERLINK
"http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/"http://gr
oups.-yahoo.com/-group/DigitalBla-ckandWhiteThePri-nt/files/

BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT
YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE �OWNER� AND
�MODERATORS� OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU
FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY
DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS,
GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF THE �OWNER� AND
�MODERATORS� OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE
POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE INABILITY
TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR
ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY
THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER
MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP.

Yahoo! Groups Links

____________-_________-_________-_________-_________-__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
HYPERLINK "http://mail.yahoo.com"http://mail.-yahoo.com 

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

 


--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.3/359 - Release Date: 6/8/2006



-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.3/359 - Release Date: 6/8/2006
 


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

Carl Weese remark in "The Online Photographer" May 2006 
(http://theonlinephotographer.blogspot.com/2006_05_01_theonlinephotog
rapher_archive.html) -- sorry, cannot figure out how to get link to 
a particular post from there. Nice publication, skipping stuff like 
multi-megapixels shootouts a la Michael Reichmann.

<<
The highlights of a platinum/palladium (Pt/Pd) print are nowhere 
near as bright as those of a silver print (as measured with a 
densitometer), yet highlight interpretation is probably the medium's 
greatest strength. The point is that, in a print, what counts is 
description, not absolute density. A shadow filled with clearly 
differentiated dark values is more convincingâ€"seemingly darkerâ€"than 
an area of dmax that looks like a pool of spilled India ink. Same 
for highlights.
>>

Cannot agree more -- it is all human interpretation of the human 
brain, which could be effected by any number of DMax unrelated 
reasonings.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Tyler Boley" 
<tyler@...> wrote:
>
> I think this also has a lot to do with image tonality. Certainly
> something like a still life on a black background or anything with
> areas of solid K are going to definitely appear different, no
> question. The prints we were comparing were clearly printed with a
> high emphasis on the middle tones sitting just right, and detail
> everywhere. This means only very small areas of full dmax. 
> I also was not attempting to re-introduce the tired matte vrs 
glossy
> issue, just describing an interesting experience with an unexpected
> outcome.
> I've heard from 3 or 4 big name (very) west coast silver printer
> photographers that they "hate" platinum prints, the density range 
is
> "inferior". Too bad, some of the most beautiful prints I've ever 
seen
> are platinum, some of the deadest flat prints I've seen are 
platinum.
> Some of the most beautiful prints I've seen are silver, some of the
> harshest ugly prints I've seen are silver. I don't get the dogma, I
> just don't get it. You'd think these people would know how to look 
at art.
> Also, I've said it before, I didn't say the Turner blacks appeared 
as
> dark as the gloss placks, I said the Turner prints were richer in
> impression, and the blacks "felt" as black.
> I realize some will have a lot of trouble with that kind of talk, 
all
> I can say is that these decisions are the individual artist's and
> these kinds of comparisions, with real prints not numbers, have to 
be
> done by those interested in nailing down a personal materials 
preference.
> Tyler
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Brian 
Chapman"
> <brianechapman@> wrote:
> >
> > I got my first box of the FibaPrint Gloss a couple days ago and 
in 
> > comparing the same sample images visually with the other papers 
I've 
> > been using (photo rag, william turner, german etching) it 
definately 
> > has higher dmax.  
> > 
> > However, when viewed individually, where there isn't a 
comparison 
> > print with higher dmax, the most important factor is what the 
viewer 
> > perceives as black in the image.  Before I compared them (PR and 
> > FibaPrint Gloss) side by side, I was pretty convinced that what 
I 
> > was looking at on PR was deep black.  Obviously the FibaPrint 
Gloss 
> > paper changed my perception in comparison but when I look at the 
> > prints individually I still feel like I'm looking at black in 
the PR 
> > print.  
> > 
> > I'm not trying to turn this in to a matte vs glossy debate so 
I'll 
> > leave it there ;)
> > 
> > Brian
> > http://www.brianchapmanphotography.com
> > 
> > 
> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul 
Roark" 
> > <paul.roark@> wrote:
> > >
> > > 
> > > > ... a few of us here had some SilverRag, FibaPrint Gloss, 
> > > > Fine Art Pearl, air dried fiber selenium toned silver, and 
> > > > quads on coated art papers all spread out here the other day.
> > > 
> > > > Guess which took the subjective edge in richness?
> > > > That's right, the lowly 1.7 dmax quad inks on William Turner 
> > prints.
> > > 
> > > I've also noticed that with such prints spread out on my desk, 
but 
> > in better
> > > display and lighting conditions the 2.2 dmax black makes the 
1.7 
> > look gray.
> > > Luckily most display conditions are bad enough that I'll be 
able 

> > to use my
> > > matte paper for most printing.
> > > 
> > > Paul
> > > www.PaulRoark.com
> > >
> >
>

Tyler Boley wrote:

>I think this also has a lot to do with image tonality. Certainly
>something like a still life on a black background or anything with
>areas of solid K are going to definitely appear different, no
>question. The prints we were comparing were clearly printed with a
>high emphasis on the middle tones sitting just right, and detail
>everywhere. This means only very small areas of full dmax. 
>I also was not attempting to re-introduce the tired matte vrs glossy
>issue, just describing an interesting experience with an unexpected
>outcome.
>I've heard from 3 or 4 big name (very) west coast silver printer
>photographers that they "hate" platinum prints, the density range is
>"inferior". Too bad, some of the most beautiful prints I've ever seen
>are platinum, some of the deadest flat prints I've seen are platinum.
>Some of the most beautiful prints I've seen are silver, some of the
>harshest ugly prints I've seen are silver. I don't get the dogma, I
>just don't get it. You'd think these people would know how to look at art.
>Also, I've said it before, I didn't say the Turner blacks appeared as
>dark as the gloss placks, I said the Turner prints were richer in
>impression, and the blacks "felt" as black.
>I realize some will have a lot of trouble with that kind of talk, all
>I can say is that these decisions are the individual artist's and
>these kinds of comparisions, with real prints not numbers, have to be
>done by those interested in nailing down a personal materials preference.
>Tyler
>
How about a music analogy? B&W on matte paper is sort of like a string 
quartet. It can have really smooth tones, is exquisitely detailed, and 
has sufficient range that you don't feel like you need any more with 
many scenes. Yet the range of expression is limited. There are only a 
few instruments, and you lack the brilliance of trumpets or the bottom 
end of string bass and tuba. But if you operate within the limits of the 
medium you can do amazing things. After all, there are many people who 
think the string quartet is the apex of music, and they have a 
creditable point.

The reason people want greater Dmax with their B&W prints is because 
they want more than the limited range of expression available from a 
string quartet. They accept optical brighteners because the want the 
brilliance of trumpets. They pursue gloss media for the greater Dmax 
because they want that solid bottom end of string bass and tuba.

Really, increasing Dmax is about the only thing we have left to pursue. 
B&W only communicates though variation in value. The highlight end is 
already pretty amazing. The only way we can meaningfully increase our 
visual vocabulary then is to increase Dmax.

If we could get a Dmax of, say, 2.2 on a smooth matte paper, we'd have 
all the range we could meaningfully use, and be left to actually use it. 
And that would be a hard day for many ;-)
--
Bruce Watson

Hey Jim,

Why don't you have a contest to see who can guess which company makes the Lexjet
gloss paper. The winner would receive, let's say, a box of Innova Fiba Gloss paper.

Jim Rohan


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Jim Doyle" <jdoyle1713@...> 
wrote:
>
> Well
HMMM
I wonder which one it could be?

> 
>  
> 
> Jim Doyle
> 
>  
> 
> J. Doyle Enterprises LLC
> 
> 114 Old Orchard Rd
> 
> Cherry Hill NJ 08003
> 
> 856-424-8660
> 
> HYPERLINK "http://www.shadesofpaper.com"www.shadesofpaper.com
> 
>  
> 
>    _____  
> 
> From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@...m
> [mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Max Dee
> Sent: Friday, June 09, 2006 7:35 PM
> To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: RE: [Digital BW] Silver Rag, Hahnemuehle, and Innova Fiba Gloss
> Comparison
> 
>  
> 
> Jim....Do you have numbers for Lexjet product.....-I see they have released
> a product of the same type???

If anyone is interested in the BLUES, I just posted a set of classic Blues
musicians on the ³Weekly updated ³ section of my website.
Click on the white button on the index page to see them.
While they were taken in the days of manual focus lenses and pushed tri-x,
these images were recently scanned and digitally printed.
It¹s amazing how much better I can print them using the photo shop controls
than when I printed them in the darkroom.
Take a look if you love the BLUES.

www.daschkenasphoto.com

David Aschkenas

-- 
David Aschkenas
915 N. Euclid Ave.
Pittsburgh, PA 15206
412-363-3458

www.daschkenasphoto.com



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

Bruce Watson wrote, in part:

>... B&W on matte paper is sort of like a string quartet. 
>It can have really smooth tones, is exquisitely detailed, and 
>has sufficient range that you don't feel like you need any more with 
>many scenes. Yet the range of expression is limited. ...

>The reason people want greater Dmax with their B&W prints is because 
>they want more than the limited range of expression available from a 
>string quartet. ...
> They pursue gloss media for the greater Dmax 
> because they want that solid bottom end of string bass and tuba.

> Really, increasing Dmax is about the only thing we have left to pursue. 
> B&W only communicates though variation in value. The highlight end is 
> already pretty amazing. The only way we can meaningfully increase our 
> visual vocabulary then is to increase Dmax.

> If we could get a Dmax of, say, 2.2 on a smooth matte paper, we'd have 
> all the range we could meaningfully use, and be left to actually use it...

I'd have to agree with most of this.  Dynamic range is a major part of the
game.  Just because it's there doesn't mean one has to use it all, all the
time.

Some of the non-dmax issues that remain include fragility of the medium.
Rub your finger across a Photo Rag 100% black and then rug your finger
across a Crane Silver Rag (CSR) 100% black.  The Photo Rag is wrecked; the
CSR almost looks better.  This is a huge plus for the Silver Rag paper and
others using this new technology.

Some open issues with the new technology CSR and Innova F-Type v. matte
paper is whether easy tape hanging is going to be sufficient to hold the new
papers flat and whether we'll have the glass fogging issue.  My observations
noted in a post yesterday suggest that the new gloss technology may not be
afflicted with the fogging issue, but time will tell.  Has anyone tried
simple tape hanging under glass?

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

On Jun 10, 2006, at 11:48 AM, Paul Roark wrote:
snip...
>   Has anyone tried
> simple tape hanging under glass?
>
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com

Paul,

Yes, I recently mounted (tape hung) a 16x20 Innova F-type print (on  
17x22 inch sheet paper) with no curling problems.  I'm still waiting  
(and waiting...) for SR sheets to try.  I don't like working with  
stiff, heavy papers in roll form.

Carl

Sorry if I missed this but...which is the new Lexjet glossy paper?  I 
didn't keep up with their offerings in the past so don't know which one 
would be the new one.

allan

jimrohan2002 wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> Hey Jim,
> 
> Why don't you have a contest to see who can guess which company makes 
> the Lexjet
> gloss paper. The winner would receive, let's say, a box of Innova Fiba 
> Gloss paper.
> 
> Jim Rohan
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com 
> <mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint%40yahoogroups.com>, "Jim Doyle" 
> <jdoyle1713@...>
> wrote:
>  >
>  > Well\ufffdHMMM\ufffdI wonder which one it could be?
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  > Jim Doyle
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  > J. Doyle Enterprises LLC
>  >
>  > 114 Old Orchard Rd
>  >
>  > Cherry Hill NJ 08003
>  >
>  > 856-424-8660
>  >
>  > HYPERLINK "http://www.shadesofpaper.com 
> <http://www.shadesofpaper.com>"www.shadesofpaper.com
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  > _____
>  >
>  > From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com 
> <mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint%40yahoogroups.com>
>  > [mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com 
> <mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint%40yahoogroups.com>] On Behalf Of 
> Max Dee
>  > Sent: Friday, June 09, 2006 7:35 PM
>  > To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com 
> <mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint%40yahoogroups.com>
>  > Subject: RE: [Digital BW] Silver Rag, Hahnemuehle, and Innova Fiba Gloss
>  > Comparison
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  > Jim....Do you have numbers for Lexjet product.....-I see they have 
> released
>  > a product of the same type???
> 
> 

-- 
http://allan.kaiyen.com
http://photos.kaiyen.com

Gee it's just such a mystery... who could possibly have the answer?
Still, whoever could guess correctly could twin that box of, let's say...

Innova
Fiba
gloss
paper


Hmm, I'm stumped
Tyler

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Allan Chen <allan@...> wrote:
>
> Sorry if I missed this but...which is the new Lexjet glossy paper?  I 
> didn't keep up with their offerings in the past so don't know which one 
> would be the new one.
> 
> allan
> 
> jimrohan2002 wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Hey Jim,
> > 
> > Why don't you have a contest to see who can guess which company makes 
> > the Lexjet
> > gloss paper. The winner would receive, let's say, a box of Innova Fiba 
> > Gloss paper.
> > 
> > Jim Rohan
> > 
> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com 
> > <mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint%40yahoogroups.com>, "Jim Doyle" 
> > <jdoyle1713@>
> > wrote:
> >  >
> >  > Well
HMMM
I wonder which one it could be?

> >  >
> >  >
> >  >
> >  > Jim Doyle
> >  >
> >  >
> >  >
> >  > J. Doyle Enterprises LLC
> >  >
> >  > 114 Old Orchard Rd
> >  >
> >  > Cherry Hill NJ 08003
> >  >
> >  > 856-424-8660
> >  >
> >  > HYPERLINK "http://www.shadesofpaper.com 
> > <http://www.shadesofpaper.com>"www.shadesofpaper.com
> >  >
> >  >
> >  >
> >  > _____
> >  >
> >  > From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com 
> > <mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint%40yahoogroups.com>
> >  > [mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com 
> > <mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint%40yahoogroups.com>] On Behalf Of 
> > Max Dee
> >  > Sent: Friday, June 09, 2006 7:35 PM
> >  > To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com 
> > <mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint%40yahoogroups.com>
> >  > Subject: RE: [Digital BW] Silver Rag, Hahnemuehle, and Innova Fiba Gloss
> >  > Comparison
> >  >
> >  >
> >  >
> >  > Jim....Do you have numbers for Lexjet product.....-I see they have 
> > released
> >  > a product of the same type???
> > 
> > 
> 
> -- 
> http://allan.kaiyen.com
> http://photos.kaiyen.com
>

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

 --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark" <paul.roark@...> 
wrote:

>
> Bruce Watson wrote, in part:
> 
> >... B&W on matte paper is sort of like a string quartet. 
> >It can have really smooth tones, is exquisitely detailed, and 
> >has sufficient range that you don't feel like you need any more with 
> >many scenes. Yet the range of expression is limited. ...
> 
> >The reason people want greater Dmax with their B&W prints is because 
> >they want more than the limited range of expression available from a 
> >string quartet. ...
> > They pursue gloss media for the greater Dmax 
> > because they want that solid bottom end of string bass and tuba.
> 
> > Really, increasing Dmax is about the only thing we have left to pursue. 
> > B&W only communicates though variation in value. The highlight end is 
> > already pretty amazing. The only way we can meaningfully increase our 
> > visual vocabulary then is to increase Dmax.
> 
> > If we could get a Dmax of, say, 2.2 on a smooth matte paper, we'd have 
> > all the range we could meaningfully use, and be left to actually use it...
> 
> I'd have to agree with most of this.  Dynamic range is a major part of the
> game.  Just because it's there doesn't mean one has to use it all, all the
> time.
> 
> Some of the non-dmax issues that remain include fragility of the medium.
> Rub your finger across a Photo Rag 100% black and then rug your finger
> across a Crane Silver Rag (CSR) 100% black.  The Photo Rag is wrecked; the
> CSR almost looks better.  This is a huge plus for the Silver Rag paper and
> others using this new technology.
> 
> Some open issues with the new technology CSR and Innova F-Type v. matte
> paper is whether easy tape hanging is going to be sufficient to hold the new
> papers flat and whether we'll have the glass fogging issue.  My observations
> noted in a post yesterday suggest that the new gloss technology may not be
> afflicted with the fogging issue, but time will tell.  Has anyone tried
> simple tape hanging under glass?
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com
>

--- 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

"A beautiful print is a beautiful print, whatever it is on, whatever it's
density range, I still 
don't get it.
Tyler"

 

Amen to that brother!

 

The search for the holy grail of prints needs to be turned toward the mind
and NOT the limitation of the media being used to create it. I can certainly
understand the desire to have a full palette of densities ( and color) to
work with in combination with the textural side, to make a print. But I
don't understand the obsession that some show towards that only.

 

EJ Neilsen 

 

Eric Neilsen Photography

4101 Commerce Street, Suite 9

Dallas, TX 75226

214-827-8301

http://ericneilsenphotography.com

 

Skype : ejprinter



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

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Rem P Roberti <remegius@...> 
wrote:
>
> I like this discussion because I often find myself trying to "ruin" images by over 
manipulating focus, tone, and introducing grain and vignetting!

Maybe I should just look for a junked lens!!

Steve

> >
> > Thank you, well said.  It's so easy to get caught up in the numbers
> > and think that's all that counts.  There's a whole 'nother world of
> > perception out there that often defies explanation, especially when it
> > comes to art.  
> >
> > Take, for example, the recent work of Sally Mann, who is one of
> > today's most acclaimed photographic artists
> >
> > "Mann has won numerous awards, including Guggenheim and National
> > Endowment for the Arts fellowships. Her photographs are in the
> > permanent collections of many museums, including The Museum of Modern
> > Art and the Whitney Museum of American Art in New York, and the
> > Smithsonian American Art Museum in Washington, D.C."
> >
> > Her current Deep South photos are bringing wide acclaim, yet they are
> > the very antithesis of everything we attribute to AA and the western
> > landscape school:  often underexposed, out of focus, extreme
> > vignetting, corner softness, light leak streaks, or any combination of
> > these.  Yet, they convey a powerful emotional intensity.  Here's a
> > quote of her answering a question about her equipment:
> >
> > "Well, you know I told you that none of my equipment has ever been any
> > good, I certainly could go out and buy a good, tack-sharp lens that
> > would take the perfect picture that's in focus from end to end. But
> > instead, I spend an awful lot of time at that antique mall looking
> > around for these lenses with just the right amount of decrepitude. The
> > glue has to be peeling off of the lens elements, it's great if its
> > mildewed and out of whack—a lens is made up of several different
> > pieces of glass which are supposed to stay glued in the right
> > relationship with each other—but my most prized lens has one of the
> > pieces of glass askew, so when the light comes in it it's refulgent.
> > It just bounces all around and does this great sort of luminescent
> > thing on the glass. You can tell a good ruined lens right from the
> > get-go....they are the ones you find in the trash cans of old photo
> > studios, in some ghost town in Iowa. I mean, that's the kind of lens
> > I'm looking for."
> >
> > Some incredibly beautiful landscapes are grainy, soft focus and low
> > dmax (often platinum).  There is more to this than numbers.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Clayton
> >
> >
> > Info on black and white digital printing at    
> > http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm
> >
> >
> >   
> 
> 
> A very good point, Clayton. I have often said that Cartier-Bresson, who 
> was known as Mr. Leica, could as well have been using a Brownie Hawkeye. 
> And in that world, in the context of those incredibly compelling 
> photographs, Photoshop is virtually meaningless. The power of the images 
> transcended the technique. Which, I think, leads to a very important 
> question that all of us who pursue fine art photography should ask: at 
> what point do we become trapped by the technology.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Rem
>

>"A beautiful print is a beautiful print, whatever it is on, whatever it's
>density range, I still
>don't get it.
>Tyler"

I don't own a reflection densitometer, and I just sold seven different 8x10 
portrait prints in a fundraising auction.  Admittedly the prices were 
inflated for that cause, but there had to be a reason that each auctioned 
for $275.  All were processed through Picasa2, printed with an Epson R220 
using MIS UTR2W ink on Premier Art Hot Press paper, and archivally mounted 
and framed by me. Lighting for each shot was on-site, and inconsistant, 
depending on the circumstance.

I find Picasa2 very helpful, and use it most of the time.  The Epson R220 
with the carbon ink is nothing short of amazing, and superb in good lighting 
conditions.  I just wanted to note here that newbies to digital black and 
white, like myself, can make prints at least equal to, and with a little 
practice better than, prints I used to get from my darkroom after years of 
wet work.

(Now my two Beseler 23c's will stay in boxes much longer, along with the 
other great wet equipment.)

Frank Vincent

Tyler Boley wrote:

>I've heard from 3 or 4 big name (very) west coast silver printer
>photographers that they "hate" platinum prints, the density range is
>"inferior". Too bad, some of the most beautiful prints I've ever seen
>are platinum, some of the deadest flat prints I've seen are platinum.
>Some of the most beautiful prints I've seen are silver, some of the
>harshest ugly prints I've seen are silver. I don't get the dogma, I
>just don't get it. You'd think these people would know how to look at art.
>Also, I've said it before, I didn't say the Turner blacks appeared as
>dark as the gloss placks, I said the Turner prints were richer in
>impression, and the blacks "felt" as black.
>I realize some will have a lot of trouble with that kind of talk, all
>I can say is that these decisions are the individual artist's and
>these kinds of comparisions, with real prints not numbers, have to be
>done by those interested in nailing down a personal materials preference.
>Tyler
>
Let me try again. Different analogy: writing.

Pigment inks on matte paper has a limited range because of the Dmax 
issue, as we've discussed into the ground. Think of this restriction in 
the same way that iambic pentameter is a restriction in poetry. 
Shakespeare didn't have any trouble expressing what he had to say in 
iambic pentameter. Clearly, you can say a lot in a restricted medium. 
However, not many people will disagree with the idea that you can 
express an even wider range of ideas in free verse. Some will argue 
instead that free verse is actually more difficult precisely because of 
the lack of restriction. [apologies to Robert Adams]

I think some people are looking for more Dmax simply because they don't 
like working inside the restricted range of what we now have with 
pigment inks on matte papers. To get the increase of Dmax, they are 
willing to give up matte and go to glossy.

This is OK with me. I'm not doing it (yet) and don't feel any pressing 
need to, with the notable exception of a few images that I just can't 
make look right with the current media restrictions. I'll get to them 
later maybe. But if other people have to get there now, I'm not going to 
impede their efforts.

I've always been an advocate of people using the tools with which they 
feel most comfortable. I don't know how you can do your best by your 
vision any other way. So if people want glossy stock, more power to 
them. If I am willing to accept the restrictions of matte stock, more 
power to me.
--
Bruce Watson

Tyler,
	You misunderstand.  Which Lexjet paper, ie _their_ name, is the "new 
one."  I'm not asking what paper it actually is, I"m just asking to 
which Lexjet product you are referring.  For instance, I'd love to 
compare prices, but if I don't know which lexjet product you're talking 
about, I can't do that :-).

thanks,
allan

Tyler Boley wrote:

> 
> 
> Gee it's just such a mystery... who could possibly have the answer?
> Still, whoever could guess correctly could twin that box of, let's say...
> 
> Innova
> Fiba
> gloss
> paper

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Allan Chen <allan@...> wrote:
>
> Tyler,
> 	You misunderstand.
Sorry, you are right. But I was having too much fun.

>  Which Lexjet paper, ie _their_ name, is the "new 
> one."  I'm not asking what paper it actually is, I"m just asking to 
> which Lexjet product you are referring.  For instance, I'd love to 
> compare prices, but if I don't know which lexjet product you're talking 
> about, I can't do that :-).

Right! Got it! I have it at a different location, if someone does not answer you by Monday I'll 
find it then.
Tyler

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, hogarth@... wrote:
...
> Let me try again. Different analogy: writing.
> 
Well it's Sunday and I don't feel like doing the yard work quite yet, so even though people 
are probably sick of this I feel like a few more attempts at finding some common ground.

> Pigment inks on matte paper has a limited range because of the Dmax 
> issue, as we've discussed into the ground. Think of this restriction in 
> the same way that iambic pentameter is a restriction in poetry. 
> Shakespeare didn't have any trouble expressing what he had to say in 
> iambic pentameter. Clearly, you can say a lot in a restricted medium. 
> However, not many people will disagree with the idea that you can 
> express an even wider range of ideas in free verse. Some will argue 
> instead that free verse is actually more difficult precisely because of 
> the lack of restriction. [apologies to Robert Adams]

Restriction restriction... you just lost me again. If someone happens to make a print that, 
for that particular image and tonailty, has that special something extra, that presense, on 
a paper with a (coincidentally) lower damx, that would hardly be a restriction. In fact, open 
the bar, I'd say that the image has been set free.
That same image may very well not have that presence on a paper with a more traditional 
photo surface or more dmax. That would be a restriction. It's far from inconcievable, I've 
seen it happen. Dick Arentz's most successful pieces are hard to try and imagine with the 
same presence in silver and having to print those pieces in silver would most definitely 
restrict him as a printmaker. Fredrick Evens ceased photographing altogether when 
platinum was no longer availble according to myth. Alternately platinum or matte ink 
would probably kill a Chiarenza.
By the way, I'm certainly not advocating low dmax, or suggesting the prints we were 
comparing in the original post were preferable BECAUSE of lower damx. Also, I've certainly 
seen my share of dead prints on HPR, I actually think it's a hard paper to print on as it so 
easily slips into a flat look with no help from the card-like surface character.

> 
> I think some people are looking for more Dmax simply because they don't 
> like working inside the restricted range of what we now have with 
> pigment inks on matte papers. To get the increase of Dmax, they are 
> willing to give up matte and go to glossy.

I'm all for it, there are countless artists for whom that is the apropriate endevour. I work 
with those papers as well.
In my formative phot years I lived and breathed the Ansel Adams books, the initial 
publications. I had never seen a master silver print. The books are full of talk of blacks, 
optimizing blacks, pusing dmax, etc. etc.. I did all the tests, learned all the techniques, 
made the best prints I possible could, always wondering if I was achiving this brilliance 
and richness constantly spoken of in all the books.
Then an Adams exhibition came to town, I specifically recall the impression of 
dissapointment when I saw the prints. The whites were no more brilliant the the white 
walls behind the prints, the blacks no blacker or more impressive than the black suit on 
the guy standing next to me. The impact was not from this hyped dynamic range at all. 
They were nice, rich, silvery, etc., but whatever luminousity they had as objects had more 
to do with everything "esle" about the piece, aided by minimal and careful use of blacks 
and whites. With all due respect to Adam's incomparable talent and contribution, some 
were even a bit harsh...
Serioulsy, we're all talking and writing and measuring, we need to be printing and looking, 
really looking at a lot of great prints to see what the medium is capable of, and what it's 
not.
...
> I've always been an advocate of people using the tools with which they 
> feel most comfortable...

Partially what I'm saying, partially. Primarily, the tools that most bring their imagery to life, 
but comfort is a factor there as well.
This won't feel very good on the DIGITAL B&W list, but I wish so many weren't herding 
away from the darkroom, the silver print is still one of the most beautiful photographic 
processes that inkjet still fails to replace for that particular look. I don't think it should 
have to, and the marketplace thinks it does.
Tyler

You are a poet.
>  How about a music analogy? B&W on matte paper is sort of like a string
>  quartet. It can have really smooth tones, is exquisitely detailed, and
>  has sufficient range that you don't feel like you need any more with
>  many scenes. Yet the range of expression is limited. There are only a
>  few instruments, and you lack the brilliance of trumpets or the bottom
>  end of string bass and tuba. But if you operate within the limits of 
> the
>  medium you can do amazing things. After all, there are many people who
>  think the string quartet is the apex of music, and they have a
>  creditable point.
>
>  The reason people want greater Dmax with their B&W prints is because
>  they want more than the limited range of expression available from a
>  string quartet. They accept optical brighteners because the want the
>  brilliance of trumpets. They pursue gloss media for the greater Dmax
>  because they want that solid bottom end of string bass and tuba.
>
>  Really, increasing Dmax is about the only thing we have left to 
> pursue.
>  B&W only communicates though variation in value. The highlight end is
>  already pretty amazing. The only way we can meaningfully increase our
>  visual vocabulary then is to increase Dmax.
>
>  If we could get a Dmax of, say, 2.2 on a smooth matte paper, we'd have
>  all the range we could meaningfully use, and be left to actually use 
> it.
>  And that would be a hard day for many ;-)
>  --
>  Bruce Watson


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

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "jimrohan2002" <jimrohan@...> 
wrote:
>
> 
> Hey Jim,
> 
> Why don't you have a contest to see who can guess which company makes the Lexjet
> gloss paper. The winner would receive, let's say, a box of Innova Fiba Gloss paper.
> 
> Jim Rohan
>  
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Jim Doyle" <jdoyle1713@> 
> wrote:
> >
> > Well…HMMM…I wonder which one it could be?

> > Jim Doyle
> > 
> > Jim....Do you have numbers for Lexjet product.....-I see they have released
> > a product of the same type???
>
If you're having a contest, I hope to win the real Innova & not the Lexjet version.  I'm a bit 
embarrassed about this!  In my building there's a photo lab that buys a lot of stuff from 
Lexjet.  They got a box of the fiber glossy, tried it for BW, & were going to send the box 
back. They gave me some of the Lexjet product to try, telling me it was Innova, & I 
subsequently wrote a couple of notes - including one to folks in the DigitalBWThePrint 
print exchange - saying how bad I thought the Innova looked, because of its pitted 
surface.  

When Michael Reichmann wrote favorably about Innova, I tried a new package of 'real' 
Innova from Exim Vaios & found that it was a different surface than Lexjet's, with less 
noticeable pits.  A useful paper, I think; I'll know for sure when I've got a profile to try in 
color too.

Anyhow the two are different, & don't form your opinion about Innova by trying the Lexjet 
substitute!