Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,691   Posts: 1,548,911   Online: 860
      
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 36
  1. #11
    Rick A's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    north central Pa
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,983
    Images
    33
    I print on RC most of the time. When I get a negative that really bowls me over I go through my FB and try to visualize which paper will best show the image qualities I think I want to show. Warm tone or cold, glossy or pearl, then what it will tone like. After all these years, I'm finally getting better at seeing the finished print in my viewfinder.
    Rick A
    Argentum aevum

  2. #12
    hpulley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Guelph, Ontario, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,214
    Images
    75
    I find they are different enough that there is no point in starting with one and then switching to another paper. Starting RC and switching to FB seems to be difficult for me, there are enough differences that I feel I'm starting over to get the times, contrasts, dry down and other aspects the same.

    I really prefer fiber almost entirely. It just seems so much more real compared to a floppy RC print. Even dry mounted I find the surface to be so much nicer with fiber. I still have some RC right now but I think when I'm done with it I won't replace it while I will surely replace my fiber, perhaps with the exception of postcard exchange paper but maybe even that!
    Harry Pulley - Visit the BLIND PRINT EXCHANGE FORUM

    Happiness is...

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,066
    2 more cents -
    I scan for very rough evaluation, mostly to confirm that I want to continue with the image.
    I use Ilford MG IV RC 8x10 glossy to develop the final recipe (all burning, dodging, filter mix, etc.) I scan this 8x10 as a digital record of the final print to be used for competition submittals, etc.) Web site too, if I ever get around to it.
    Final prints are the same paper, but fiber, and larger. The differences between them don't bother me, I adjust the "recipe" during test strip phase, and for me the saved work, print washing, etc is worth the final adjustment, it gets me very close to the final image for the larger print. I also sense that just making a larger print (usually 16x20) will require an adjustment, just because of the scale change. In the end, I usually tweak the final print based on it's size. Sometimes I change my mind from the original, after living with the image for a while.
    In the end, for me, it doesn't pay to use fiber for small prints, and I need only two boxes of paper, one 8x10 RC, 16x20 fiber. Although, I tried some Ilford MG warmtone lately, and love the selenium toned effect, so I may be changing again, but that's another story. . .

  4. #14
    hpulley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Guelph, Ontario, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,214
    Images
    75
    Love Ilford MGWTFB, beautiful in selenium as you say. I find the MGWTRC to be different though I currently have 11x14" in both pearl RC and semi-matt FB.
    Harry Pulley - Visit the BLIND PRINT EXCHANGE FORUM

    Happiness is...

  5. #15
    brian steinberger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Shooter
    Med. Format RF
    Posts
    2,331
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    100
    Good responses here. Seems there are a few in each camp. I believe MGWT RC pearl is a wonderfully beautiful paper, not as much as the FB version though. MGIV RC is great too, sometimes I actually think it's tonality is better than the FB version, I still struggle with MGIV FB sometimes.

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Istanbul, Turkey
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    361
    I tried the route of starting with RC and finishing with FB in the hope of saving time, but eventually found that it's actually more time consuming. As stated above, the tonal qualities are just too different to come up with an easy and successful rule of translation.

    The only exception may be prints which would require an extensive amount of burning in. Then it may be worthwhile to try different burn-ins with RC to get a rough idea.

  7. #17
    brian steinberger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Shooter
    Med. Format RF
    Posts
    2,331
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by ooze View Post
    The only exception may be prints which would require an extensive amount of burning in. Then it may be worthwhile to try different burn-ins with RC to get a rough idea.
    This is the conclusion I'm coming to.

  8. #18
    Vincent Brady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Co. Kildare - Ireland
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    2,002
    Images
    169
    I always make 8x10 RC prints and live with them for a while before I decide if they are worth going larger with and on FB. It's more to judge the compositional elements that I use RC for, as I hate to work really hard on a FB print only to decide in the end that the print is not worth it.

  9. #19
    RalphLambrecht's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Central florida,USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,572
    Images
    1
    I'm getting confused with this thread. The original question was moving from RC to FB, but a few responses seem to address electronic proofing. How did this get in here?
    Regards

    Ralph W. Lambrecht
    www.darkroomagic.comrorrlambrec@ymail.com[/URL]
    www.waybeyondmonochrome.com

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Austin
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    390
    Images
    11
    "a few responses seem to address electronic proofing. How did this get in here?"

    Easy: some proof on RC, some proof on a computer. Welcome to the 21st century!

    I proof on RC and, like V. Brady, live with the proof for a while. If I like it, I proof it again on FB and go from there.

    I am much more interested in the substance and content of a photo than I am in the technical qualities of a print so the differences between RC and FB really does not matter for what I'm looking for in a photo: emotional impact, dialogue with the medium, dialogue with other photographs and art forms, spunk, funk, etc!
    Jeff Glass

    Photo Blog
    Website

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin