Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 2 [3]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Bartya - What about the new Ilford Gold Fibre Silk  (Read 27689 times)
Peter Frahm
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 43


« Reply #40 on: January 07, 2008, 11:25:16 AM »
ReplyReply

Diane,

Anything sitting next to Hanne Fine Art Pearl is going to look warm. That paper is excruciatingly bright, clinical is the word that comes to mind.

As stated in the Michael rundown of these three Baryta papers. The Ilford is the warmest of the lot and has noticable texture. I'm not sure I would call it subtle. IMO the Ilford shows way too much gloss differential for my taste.

Michael mentions "essentially no gloss differential" on the Harman. It is there if you are pushing contrast in your prints. Difficult to pick up in decent tonal transitions from dark to naked white. If you have hard, dark lines next to naked white, it's noticable. the harman seems to hold it's shape after printing..slight curl, no big deal...nothing is as bad as the Innova stuff in terms of changing shape..read posts above.

I like the Harman Baryta best of the three Barytas. the Harman does require less sharpening on your files. Fine detail is rendered quite differently on this paper than what most are used to on any paper. It's an interesting paper. The Harman appears more glossy than the others but I don't think it's any more glossy than the Epson...it's smoother and gives it away a bit more.


The Epson paper is not a Baryta but basically what was written, in posts above, about it's color holds. Slightly cool like the Innova Ultra Smooth Gloss, but I like a bit of cool. I'm not a huge fan of warm papers, especially for black and white. The Epson has a bit more texture than the Harman, but it looks great. I'm biased towards the Epson Fiber because of the ease of handling..flatness factor and it's ability to produce great black. When they designed this paper it seems they considered a few extra details.


In another thread, People were noticing the scuffing issue on the Harman Baryta. I've noticed this too. It could be that the paper is so smooth that it shows scuffs more readily..not sure what it is but I do know that you have to baby this stuff. However, didn't your Mom always tell you to hold the family pictures by their edges?

Hope that helps.

Peter
« Last Edit: January 07, 2008, 11:26:26 AM by Peter Frahm » Logged
deanwork
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 736


« Reply #41 on: January 07, 2008, 12:40:05 PM »
ReplyReply

I like the Harmon too and it IS really sharp, but I just don't see where it looks much different than rc papers out there and ouch, the cost.

I'm comparing a buch of print edge colors right now and the Innova Satin and USGloss/Epson are much bluer than any fiber print I have around here, made by Ilford, Agfa, Oriental, etc. It is even noticeably bluer than Kodak rc black and white papers that are full of obas. The Harmon and Ilford are about the same as most fiber prints edge color, but not as warm as portiga rapid. The Harmon and Ilford Gold are warmer than the rc Kodak silver paper.

I would love the Innova Satin with a slightly less blue oba base. That would be perfection to me.

john
Logged
TylerB
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 371


WWW
« Reply #42 on: January 07, 2008, 12:40:48 PM »
ReplyReply

Diane, here are paper white readings for most of these papers I did a month ago or so-

Hahnemuhle FineArt Baryta- 99.9, 1.2, -3.7
Hahnemuhle PhotoRag Pearl- 98.5, 0.1, 1.6
Harman Glossy FB AI- 99.9, 0.2., -3.0
Innova FibaPrint Ultra Smooth Gloss- 97.7, 1.2, -5.4
Innova FibaPrint F-Type White Semi-Matte- 97.7, 0.8, -3.6
Ilford Gold Fiber Silk- 99.8, 0.1, -0.6

These are LAB numbers. No paper is "virtually" white, so the 1st number will always be less than 100. The second two would be 0 if the paper were dead neutral. A negative last number indicates blue, so you can see that GFS is quite neutral compared to the others. Also, the Innova semi matte is a bit less blue than the gloss.
Whether or not that is subjectively desirable is up to the individual.
Hope that helps. John's visual comparison was going up just as I was writing this, your eyes are always better than numbers regarding these kinds of decisions.
Tyler
« Last Edit: January 07, 2008, 12:42:40 PM by TylerB » Logged
Peter Frahm
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 43


« Reply #43 on: January 07, 2008, 01:15:57 PM »
ReplyReply

John,

I agree re the gloss on the Harman. It gets very close to an RC look, sort of plastic looking.
Logged
JeffKohn
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1671



WWW
« Reply #44 on: January 07, 2008, 01:40:02 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
John,

I agree re the gloss on the Harman. It gets very close to an RC look, sort of plastic looking.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=165680\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I felt the same way, to me this paper seems very similar to a heavyweight glossy RC paper. It has almost no texture at all and is noticeably glossier than the other fiber papers I've looked at (which I suppose is what some people like about it).

Also interesting that the Harman paper is not as thick as the Hahnemuhle despite supposedly being about the same weight.
Logged

picnic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 574


« Reply #45 on: January 07, 2008, 02:12:54 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Diane, here are paper white readings for most of these papers I did a month ago or so-

Hahnemuhle FineArt Baryta- 99.9, 1.2, -3.7
Hahnemuhle PhotoRag Pearl- 98.5, 0.1, 1.6
Harman Glossy FB AI- 99.9, 0.2., -3.0
Innova FibaPrint Ultra Smooth Gloss- 97.7, 1.2, -5.4
Innova FibaPrint F-Type White Semi-Matte- 97.7, 0.8, -3.6
Ilford Gold Fiber Silk- 99.8, 0.1, -0.6

These are LAB numbers. No paper is "virtually" white, so the 1st number will always be less than 100. The second two would be 0 if the paper were dead neutral. A negative last number indicates blue, so you can see that GFS is quite neutral compared to the others. Also, the Innova semi matte is a bit less blue than the gloss.
Whether or not that is subjectively desirable is up to the individual.
Hope that helps. John's visual comparison was going up just as I was writing this, your eyes are always better than numbers regarding these kinds of decisions.
Tyler
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=165675\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Thanks Tyler and others.  My papers (except Hahnemuhle) should be on their way (though the EEF may still be OS) and I'll have to try them on my own but these numbers are helpful.  I found the Museo Silver Rag (warmer) and the Innova F-WT and from HFAP to the Innova FWT there's quite a range from quite cool to quite warm in those.  I'll print monos and color on all and try to make a reasonable judgement based on all their attributes (including handling).

Thanks again.  I'll continue to watch this thread and others about these papers, problems, etc.

Diane
Logged
dealy663
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 57


« Reply #46 on: January 07, 2008, 05:25:41 PM »
ReplyReply

My measurements of the Gold Fibre Silk are very similar to Tyler's.

Visually this paper appears to be very warm (at least compared to all the other fiber based glossy emulators - with the exception of Silver Rag).

What also interesting is that with Epson K3 inks on my 3800 and in ABW mode, the dark end is also very neutral on this paper, I think I had a lab measurement of 4, 0, 0 for the black patch. I've never seen an X,0,0 Lab measurement on any paper I've measured (not that I've examined each of the thousands of patches I've measured over the past couple years).

All that said, I'm also of the opinion that Gold Fibre Silk is barely any different in feel than any other RC paper, the back doesn't feel fibrous at all.

I'm still rather non-plussed by all of these newfangled fiber glossy papers. None of them so far live up to the hype IMHO.

Derek

Quote
Diane, here are paper white readings for most of these papers I did a month ago or so-

Hahnemuhle FineArt Baryta- 99.9, 1.2, -3.7
Hahnemuhle PhotoRag Pearl- 98.5, 0.1, 1.6
Harman Glossy FB AI- 99.9, 0.2., -3.0
Innova FibaPrint Ultra Smooth Gloss- 97.7, 1.2, -5.4
Innova FibaPrint F-Type White Semi-Matte- 97.7, 0.8, -3.6
Ilford Gold Fiber Silk- 99.8, 0.1, -0.6

These are LAB numbers. No paper is "virtually" white, so the 1st number will always be less than 100. The second two would be 0 if the paper were dead neutral. A negative last number indicates blue, so you can see that GFS is quite neutral compared to the others. Also, the Innova semi matte is a bit less blue than the gloss.
Whether or not that is subjectively desirable is up to the individual.
Hope that helps. John's visual comparison was going up just as I was writing this, your eyes are always better than numbers regarding these kinds of decisions.
Tyler
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=165675\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged

deanwork
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 736


« Reply #47 on: January 12, 2008, 12:46:56 PM »
ReplyReply

Tyler,

Thanks for those readings I'll file them away. There is a lot of blue in most of these.

Your numbers are in line with what I'm seeing here. The only two of these that really are close to matching the base of a traditional neutral tone fiber (not rc) silver paper, like Gallerie or Kodak, or Brovira, is the Ilford Gold and Silver Rag. Of course we know why they put so much oba in these papers...it makes the gamut look more vibrant and the dynamic range of everything more dramatic. Even the illusion of the dmax is greater due to the white point.  That isn't new though. With the rc gloss papers it is the same story. It all depends on what you want to do with them of course. It's nice to have variety.

John



Quote
My measurements of the Gold Fibre Silk are very similar to Tyler's.

Visually this paper appears to be very warm (at least compared to all the other fiber based glossy emulators - with the exception of Silver Rag).

What also interesting is that with Epson K3 inks on my 3800 and in ABW mode, the dark end is also very neutral on this paper, I think I had a lab measurement of 4, 0, 0 for the black patch. I've never seen an X,0,0 Lab measurement on any paper I've measured (not that I've examined each of the thousands of patches I've measured over the past couple years).

All that said, I'm also of the opinion that Gold Fibre Silk is barely any different in feel than any other RC paper, the back doesn't feel fibrous at all.

I'm still rather non-plussed by all of these newfangled fiber glossy papers. None of them so far live up to the hype IMHO.

Derek
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=165742\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged
Kenneth Sky
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 421


WWW
« Reply #48 on: January 12, 2008, 03:55:01 PM »
ReplyReply

Printing on an HP B9180 in B&W is extremely neutral using Ilford's "canned" icc profile for Galerie Gold. However, when viewing surface reflection at an acute angle the highlights have a dulled reflection. It's still every bit as good as Harman at half the price (C$ 2.50 for a 13"x19" sheet).
Logged
picnic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 574


« Reply #49 on: January 12, 2008, 05:19:51 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Printing on an HP B9180 in B&W is extremely neutral using Ilford's "canned" icc profile for Galerie Gold. However, when viewing surface reflection at an acute angle the highlights have a dulled reflection. It's still every bit as good as Harman at half the price (C$ 2.50 for a 13"x19" sheet).
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=166793\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I just printed for the first time on the Ilford Gold Silk--both mono and color using the 'canned' profiles for the 3800.  I printed the Harman earlier in the week.  The Harman is too glossy for me--and I prefer the  bit warmer Gold Silk.  I compared it to the Epson Semigloss and the surface is very similar but becomes 'smoother'-not so 'sparkly' as it ages a bit--and, in my print, has no GD, only slight in SG.  I objected to that taking if from the printer, but overall, probably prefer the Innova Semi Matte--but not the price (though would prefer it a bit warmer).  I'm not sure that I can justify the big difference between the Innova F-SM and the Ilford--esp. under glass.  I bought the Innova F-SM in smaller size to use for a boxed portfolio.  The Harman seems more fragile in surface also.  I'll still withhold judgment until I print the EEF but it will have to WOW me--and I didn't order the Hahnemuhle yet either.  The EEF is still BO at Atlex in 8.5 x 11---but I'm guessing that for the price I'll not choose it.  In all honesty, I'm not totally thrilled by these 2 yet--altho' the Harman has good dark blacks and quite good detail--and the Ilford appeals more to me because of the warmth.  I paricularly liked my color print from it.  

BTW--the Ilford is about $2.19 per 13 x 19 sheet at Atlex if I divided correctly.  The EEF is 4.46 and the Harman is 4.19---and so far, best price for INnova SM at same size is $4.11 (though I will likely buy 17 x 22).

Diane
« Last Edit: January 12, 2008, 05:25:29 PM by picnic » Logged
deanwork
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 736


« Reply #50 on: January 12, 2008, 06:27:31 PM »
ReplyReply

From all reports the Epson variety is the Innova USGloss with a thicker base, and it lies flatter, which is nice. They are both too expensive. I like the price of the Ilford and the surface of the Innova Satin. But I agree we need a print base more like the Ilford in color, esp for black and white. We are really close to having exactly what I've always wanted.
john
Logged
mminegis
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 64


WWW
« Reply #51 on: January 19, 2008, 10:01:57 PM »
ReplyReply

I was so excited to try this paper today with my R2400. Unfortunately, after several trials, I cannot get rid of the lines (are these called pizza wheel marks?) all over the surface. I never had this before with other glossy papers (like Fine Art Pearl). I did try thick paper on/off, sheet feeder rear/top etc., without any success. Such a shame.... especially for this price!

Now, I am back with my good old Photo Rag..... I would love to find something semi glossy for my lake (deep blue water) shots, though. What I didn't like aboout Fine Art Pearl was its inconsistency: a huge difference between one box to another - some had bizzare surface marks. What is Photo Rag Pearl like?  And/or, is there any trick to eliminate the lines abovestated?

Thanks!

Mari
Logged

[span style='color:blue']Mari Minegishi photography[/span]
William Morse
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 174


WWW
« Reply #52 on: May 20, 2008, 02:29:11 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi John-
Found this while researching the Gold Silk. I'm intrigued by your comment re: linearizing the glop, but completely clueless about how one would do it. Any comments?

Thanks, Bill


Quote
Because of the nature of the totally different ( and innovative) glop channel on the Z3100 it is critical that the amount of glop be linearized specifically for that emulsion. Hp has their basic set up standard for their Satin and Gloss rc papers that are even different than Epson rc emulsions and perform perfectly with the Z without any spraying needed. The Ilford Gold is totally a new animal. And, I agree, it was surely created with Epson K3 in mind because that is major market at this point in time, especially for desktop units, but also for mid sized and large format models.

john
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=162526\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged

Wm. Morse Editions
A Fine-Art Digital Printmaking Studio
Photography, Limited Editions, Film Drum Scanning
Restored Early 20th Century Photos of China
www.MorseEditions.com
USA_Stewart
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 8


« Reply #53 on: May 20, 2008, 10:16:59 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: deanwork,Jan 5 2008, 11:54 AM
Stewart,

This method of eliminating the roller marks still working for ya, with the gloss enhancer channel turned off? I am very interested in using the Ilford Gold this way. The Epson is way too expensive.

John


Deanwork - John,

I have also been using Ilford Galerie Gold Fibre Silk paper with the Z3100. I use the Fine Art Pearl (more ink) setting with the gloss enhancer set to "Econo Mode." Watch that the light areas of the print do not exceed 256 or you will get blank whites that have a visible gloss differential on the paper despite the gloss enhancer. Additionally, I spray the prints with three light coats of Premier Art Print Shield to protect the print from UV, contaminates, and to ensure a uniform surface without any gloss differential. It's more work, but the prints are beautiful and the paper is cheaper than Epson's Exhibition Fiber paper which you said was too expensive for you. Use a respirator when spraying the prints. I hope this information is useful to you.

-Stewart
« Last Edit: May 20, 2008, 10:38:02 PM by USA_Stewart » Logged
USA_Stewart
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 8


« Reply #54 on: May 20, 2008, 10:22:51 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Stewart,

This method of eliminating the roller marks still working for ya, with the gloss enhancer channel turned off? I am very interested in using the Ilford Gold this way. The Epson is way too expensive.

John

PS- I visited Ruth Bernhard in her studio in San Francisco 1978 and  bought one of those prints for $60.00. Man if I had only bought a dozen of the nudes back then! She was using Portriga Rapid and Brovira at that time. That is when I started using Portriga with Benzatriazole restrainer in the developer, and toned in Selenium after seeing her prints. That was before Ilford Gallery came out. I know what you are talking about, but didn't know that was how she got her Portriga papers to shine more. Interesting. You learn something every day.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=165233\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged
Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7044


WWW
« Reply #55 on: May 20, 2008, 10:30:43 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Diane, here are paper white readings for most of these papers I did a month ago or so-

Hahnemuhle FineArt Baryta- 99.9, 1.2, -3.7
Hahnemuhle PhotoRag Pearl- 98.5, 0.1, 1.6
Harman Glossy FB AI- 99.9, 0.2., -3.0
Innova FibaPrint Ultra Smooth Gloss- 97.7, 1.2, -5.4
Innova FibaPrint F-Type White Semi-Matte- 97.7, 0.8, -3.6
Ilford Gold Fiber Silk- 99.8, 0.1, -0.6

These are LAB numbers. No paper is "virtually" white, so the 1st number will always be less than 100. The second two would be 0 if the paper were dead neutral. A negative last number indicates blue, so you can see that GFS is quite neutral compared to the others. Also, the Innova semi matte is a bit less blue than the gloss.
Whether or not that is subjectively desirable is up to the individual.
Hope that helps. John's visual comparison was going up just as I was writing this, your eyes are always better than numbers regarding these kinds of decisions.
Tyler
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=165675\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Ilford actually provides its own Lab numbers for GFS in the insert that comes with every package. They are L=97.0; a= -0.5 and b= +0.2.

Having just completed several series totaling over 300 prints with this paper I'm getting quite famliar with how it responds (Epson 3800). In a nutshell - excellent. But it has two issues: (1) it needs to be handled very carefully because it shows finger oils and surface scratches easily, and (2) there is some gloss differential which shows for L values exceeding about 92%. However, neither of these things are visible when looking at the print with a lighting angle that is correct for actually seeing the image properly - which I think is what the whole game is all about. Excellent value for money, though undoubtedly could still be improved a bit.
Logged

Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....." http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/scanning_workflows_with_silverfast_8.shtml
Pages: « 1 2 [3]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad