Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2012/06/19
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I was an Ilford Multigrade fan not the warm or the cool and I'd use the RC for my proof sheets and an occasional work print. I think its possible they still make the stuff. I saw a bunch of it at B&H not that many months ago. Somebody bought Ilford but the typeface is the same. - - from my iRabs. Mark Rabiner http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/springdays/ > From: John McMaster <john at chiaroscuro.co.nz> > Reply-To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org> > Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 18:01:50 +1200 > To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org> > Subject: Re: [Leica] The death of the silver gelatin prints > > To me there is nothing like the range of papers out there compared to a few > years back. I preferred Oriental Seagull over Galerie gloss (I liked the > matt), no Agfa warm tone (or cold for that matter) etc etc. > > john > > -----Original Message----- > > I missed the part on how the silver gelatin prints died. > > - - from my iRabs. > Mark Rabiner > http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/springdays/ > > >> Oh, and the gloss is less "annoying." The Z has a gloss optimizer >> which really helps here, I think. >> >> Although I have to say, there is something about that pure black in >> the silver print that has a lot of appeal. Just slightly more >> appealing in that case... >> >> On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 9:46 PM, Richard Man >> <richard at richardmanphoto.com>wrote: >> >>> Quite a bit sharper (this is from the same file of course), better >>> noise in the shadow and generally more contrast (macro and micro ?) >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 9:29 PM, Montie <montoid at earthlink.net> wrote: >>> >>>> Just curious, better how? More gloss, blacker blacks? >>>> etc. >>>> >>>> Montie >>>> >>>>>> Overblown sensational title? Surely you jest? :-) >>>> >>>> Yes, a tad. >>>> >>>> Yes, I went for the premium option, even with Selenium toning (50% >>>> more $). >>>> >>>> It's quite superb, just that Z+ Gloss Baryta is better. I was hoping >>>> they would be equal. >>>> >>>> >>>> On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 8:55 PM, Montie <montoid at earthlink.net> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> It's a Durst Theta 51. Was your image uploaded via Roes for their >>>>> value RC print? Not Great. Try their custom printing on Ilfobrom >>>>> Galerie Fiber (Baryta based) Semi Gloss...Superb, assuming the file >>>>> is good in the first place. 300 dpi or better etc. Your subject >>>>> title may be a tad overblown? >>>>> >>>>> Montie >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> Folks might remember that I tried doing digital negative before. >>>>>>> In >>>> the >>>>> end, unsuccessfully because my HP Z3100 is just not good for that >>>>> particular type of task (digital negative for silver contact prints >>>>> - apparently, it works great for digital negatives with alternative >>>> process). >>>>> Eventually when I have to replace the Z3100, I will probably get an >>>> Epson >>>>> and try the experiment again. >>>>> >>>>> Meanwhile, since I have to make some 17x22 prints for a couple >>>>> gallery shows, I got a 8x10 sample print from Digital Silver where >>>>> you upload >>>> the >>>>> digital file and they print it using some sort of LED laser and >>>>> then processed in wet chemical. >>>>> >>>>> I make the same print on the Z. Comparing to the Z3100 printing on >>>>> Gloss Baryta, it's no comparison, the inkjet print looks better in > every way. >>>>> >>>>> So Z+Gloss Baryta it is. >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> // richard <http://www.richardmanphoto.com> >>>> > > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information