> pr_roark wrote:
> > ... in the real world of
> > reflections and less than ideal display, good matte papers will
> > often if not usually appear to have deeper blacks than the
> > glossy ones.
Bruce Watson <bwyg@...> wrote:
> ... your "real world" doesn't match mine.
Probably not, but I think mine is rather typical of many homes and
offices.
> I've got both inkjet prints and silver gelatin prints on my
> walls, side by side under the same lighting. Framed the same
> way ...
As do I.
> It's clear to just about anyone who actually
> looks at these prints that the inkjet prints do not have
> a solid black where the silver gelatin prints do.
I took a few photos that I think illustrate what I'm seeing.
One of the silver prints on my wall is this one --
http://paulroark.com/foxtails.html It depends heavily on the
blacks. The silver print was from a digital internegative. So, I
could print it easily on matte paper for comparison. The top left
corner of the print hits 100% black.
First, before getting to the matte inkjet v. silverprint comparison,
I printed 2 full frame inkjet versions. One matte on Premier Art's
Generations Alise BW (dmax 1.74) and one on Red River's UltraPro
Satin 2 (dmax 2.35). I laid them (unframed) on a table in my living
room at took a photo of them. It's at
http://www.paulroark.com/BW-Info/Matte-Glossy-on-table.jpg
The matte print is on the left. The difference is obvious. I see
about the same thing everywhere I take these 2 prints in my house.
In the direct sun, the glossy dmax is obviously much better, but
almost nowhere else does the glossy print look as good as the matte
print.
I hung the 16x20 silver print on the wall in my living room. It's a
bit higher than usual because a larger print was there before, but
this also puts it closer to the flood lights. The lighting can be
seen at http://www.paulroark.com/BW-Info/Lighting.jpg There is a
south facing window to the right, with drapes half pulled. The
relative lightness of the ceiling and walls is apparent, and I think
not atypical of most homes.
A close-up of the 16x20 on the wall shows the seriouness of the
reflection problem. See
http://www.paulroark.com/BW-Info/16x20-on-front-wall.jpg
I printed matte versions of the top right and left corners of this
print. These were put under acrylic just like the silver print and
then, one at a time, taped into place over the silver print.
See http://www.paulroark.com/BW-Info/Matte-on-right.jpg and
http://www.paulroark.com/BW-Info/Matte-on-left.jpg
These shots were all take with the camera on a tripod in the same
location and with manual exposure, so they are identical. The Jpegs
can be pulled into Photoshop to measure the relative depth of the
blacks -- silver print v. matte print, both under acrylic.
For me, reflections are the enemy -- from the print surface as well
as from the glazing. I have not found a solution that is better than
a good matte paper, and, unfortunately, the anti-reflection acrylics
are just too expensive for me.
A better display environment would clearly be nice, but light
ceilings and walls are rather typical, and something I'm not likely
to be able to change (if I want to stay married).
> ...
> We clearly still need, as we have for a decade or more,
> a good solid black.
I totally agree.
We could also really use affordable optically coated acrylic, but I'm
not going to hold my breath for that either.
At any rate, I think these photos show one reason I generally stay
with matte papers.
Paul
www.PaulRoark.com