Digital BW, The Print

John and Harry-

Thanks for the input.  

I am beginning to wonder if we've seen significant variations in the 
surface and gloss of the CSR--Harry's despcription of "sparkle" is 
something many people have mentioned, but I don't really see that.  
The paper shows less gloss than a matte-dried gelatin print in my 
impression, which is the reason the very glossy K3 inks show a gloss 
differential.

To me, the really good matte papers are far preferable for the BW 
work I do.  The CSR may look better than the past PK papers, but it 
(with K3 on it) looks very artificial to me. 

Walt

 


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "john dean" 
<deanwork2003@...> wrote:
>
> I appologize Walt. You guys are right.I was wrong.
> 
> It has been awhile since I did these tests and I don't do black and
> white on this paper on a regular basis. I went back and looked at my
> 8x10 prints done on the 2400 with PK. If you hold these prints at 
just
> the right sharp angle you do see some gloss differential. The 
optical
> effects on the Epson rc papers are far more distracting and coarse 
though.
> 
> I used sheet media for SR and it was completely flat and that was 
hard
> to see, but if the print was not flat it would be more apparent for
> sure. The same situation applies to the color prints. When I use 
this
> media I spray it anyway but a lot of people are totally against 
toxic
> sprays and I agree it is disgusting to deal with. 
> 
> So it is there. However when sprayed with Premier Art it does
> disappear. Since I like my carbon monochome prints done on fine 
matte
> rag papers I'm not that involved with glossy output, and what a dmax
> reads on a densitometer is not a real concern for me.
> 
> I believe it is also true that these rag glossy papers are in their
> infancy and will improve a lot. I think we all agree on that.
> 
> John
>