No, both are produced because there is a market for both, it's a commercial factor at work. However your are quite correct in stating that they each have their strength and weaknesses.
Originally Posted by VoidoidRamone
I favor RC lately, due to the convenience of procesing, but when I have "nailed" a print I make a few in FB, selenize/polysulfide them and voila!
Mama took my APX away.....
I'm a fiber snob that keeps being embarrassed by how good RC can look. Over 500 prints into head-to-had testing, I find I like MG Cooltone. And the new Polycontrast IV looks really good, too (a shade better than Cooltone, to my eye).
That said, being a fan of glossy surface, I find most RC papers TOO glossy (they look plasticky) for my tastes. And, I still have found only one other paper that matches or exceeds Forte Elegance Polygrade V and Ilford Galerie, and that's Azo in Amidol...
So I continue to say that if you're wash-water impaired (Santa Fe, for instance, where people should shower with friends during their continuing drought), RC is just fine, but otherwise there are better choices for the same cost.
But in sum, I agree with those who stress that it's the picture that counts more than what it's printed on. A bad picture on beautiful paper is still a bad picture.
Sorry Dave, but there are only two ways you can make such a statement. Either you have never compared the same image printed excellently on both papers. Or you should check your optician again.
Originally Posted by Dave Miller
I sometimes have to print the same image, the best way I can, on both Ilford MGIV RC and FB for exhibitions. And I immediately see the difference. FB just has a more threedimensional quality. And I'm not the only one to see this. Non-photographing people around me notice the difference too. They cannot always describe it, but they almost always prefer the FB version. There really is a visible difference.
I grant you that the difference is smaller when frames behind glass. But I still recognise the FB version at exhibitions.
I think from past experiences, (my own included) RC has problems with stability and because of it is not taken seriously.
"...generally advocated within this forum that fibre paper gives superior printing results to resin coated material. May I offer the argument that this is false, misleading, and probably driven by snobbery?"
Snobbery, perhaps... But the pros for RC always seem to come down to how convenient it is to use.
So how can I tell when I look? There are often subtle clues, but often by looking on a bit of an angle, one can tell more by surface finish and "a look" that is difficult to articulate.
"Further if the finished print is displayed behind glass then it is IMPOSSIBLE to tell which type of paper was used. "
Longevity, surface finish, and that feel of holding something of substance in your hands.
"So, what argument can the forum offer for the exclusion of RC papers?"
(fiber based print lover)
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
Like they say, "live fast, die young."
Originally Posted by Joe Symchyshyn
I have done both, but will take up your second suggestion again shortly.
Originally Posted by argentic
I did this last week, and MAN, what a bummer. I am now the latest in my family with progressive lenses... It seems I have spasms (I can't spell) in the focusing muscles in my eyes.
Originally Posted by Dave Miller
Oh, well, at least I'm not going blind.
Last edited by Andre R. de Avillez; 08-30-2004 at 06:12 PM. Click to view previous post history.
"then it is IMPOSSIBLE to tell which type of paper was used. "
Sorry, but I can tell. Fiber looks better to me.
Originally Posted by Jennifer
Alright! Who told Kodak that I have settled on Polymax 8x10 FB SW as my absolute favorite printing medium and am using it exclusively?
Over the years I have shot literally miles of Ektachrome a hundred feet at a time and used lakes of E-6 chemistry, not to mention the color neg, paper and B&W. And yet... they just never seem to miss a chance to sit on my face at every opportunity. It's gotta be personal.
Well, hopefully there will still be Polymax DW... at a dime a sheet more.
That is called grain. It is supposed to be there.