what kind of paper do you prefer to print on?

[carlita]

i can't say i even have a preference at this point because the only thing i've ever used myself is either glossy or semimatt kodak polycontrast III RC paper (which is usually the only kind our school bookstores carry and that's the most convenient place to buy the stuff in my small town). i have some ilford fiber based stuff, but haven't used it yet. i wanna branch out!

what do you guys use? what do you suggest i stay away from?

 

[oriecat]

At this point, I have only used RC, so I still have to work my up to fiber based. Other than that, I absolutely hate glossy. I always buy Pearl. Currently using Ilford for most stuff and I also have a pack of Paterson that I use for contact sheets because its damn cheap yet still has its own niceness about it. On the Ilford I have their normal RC multicontrast and also a pack of cool tone, which I have been loving to death.

 

[motcon]

agfa multi contrast rc and fb
forte polywarmtone
sterling vc rc
luminos charcoal
cachet art paper

the only paper that i really dislike is ilford, although i shoot ilford films. the ilford papers do not take to toning very well, if at all. the exception to this is the ilford warmtone which goes to a reddish in selenium; nice affect. the agfa rc paper is my mainstay; an excellent paper.

i'll use glossy, matte, pearl; it doesn't make a difference as they all look glossy behind glass anyway. and, no; a glossy photo behind glass does not look 'double' glossy.

 

[nukie]

<smartassanswer>
HP Premium Plus Photo Paper on a HP Deskjet 930c.
</smartassanswer>

 

[motcon]

<smartassanswer>
HP Premium Plus Photo Paper on a HP Deskjet 930c.
</smartassanswer>

we're looking for paper that is truly archival and can handle highlight values, so your suggestion is disqualified.

 

[ksmattfish]

I've been using mostly Ilford RC Pearl and FB Glossy. I would agree that neither of these is great for toning if you want a very noticable effect. But I do like the effect of a 1:20 mix selinium toner; it just deepens the blacks a bit. I've had much better luck toning the Ilford Warmtone.

I sepia toned some Forte FB Matte Warmtone once, it turned bright orange! When I've tried to sepia tone the Ilford Glossy FB, it takes forever (hours) to bleach, and the effect is a very, very dark chocolate.

I have been trying Arista RC papers recently. It is available through Freestyle ( www.freestylesalesco.com ). It saves you about $10 on a pack of 100. I like it. It seems to respond basically like Ilford products, and in fact, there is a prevailing rumor claiming that Arista products are made by Ilford, and packaged generically. Ilford denies this, but I've heard it from many different sources. Whatever the truth really is, both Arista film and papers seem very similar to Ilford film and papers.

While I do really like FB Glossy for display, I go though so much paper that saving 10 cents a sheet on the Arista really adds up. I use it for working out the print and snapshots, and then when I've finally got it close to looking the way I want it I switch to the FB, and figure out the differences. The quicker processing and wash times of RC ( vs. FB ) also really adds up quickly.

 

[Jeff Canes]

I do not do my own printing, but I prefer B&W on matte to ovoid that glassily looking white that you sometimes get with B&W on glossy.

 

[terri]

I prefer Agfa classic 118, multi contrast. This was the paper recommended to me from my hand coloring instructor who does photo processing as a side business. Currently, my husband does all my printing for me (when I nag him long enough, ) and he has come to really like this paper.

From my end, it takes virtually all hand coloring mediums beautifully, and also tones very well. We used Ilford RC a few times but I'd much rather have FB paper any day of the week.

 

[havoc]

Whats the difference between Fiber and the resin coated stuff. My photo professor insists that we only buy Fiber without resin coating. What finishing differences do they have. Most of the paper i see online is resin so am i missing something?

 

[voodoocat]

I'm no expert...

i hear the top reason for printing on fiber is it's archival quality.

According to Will it's warmer than RC.

 

[motcon]

havoc;

the fiber vs rc debate is old and, frankly, tiring and stupid. i know you don't want to initiate a debate and nor do i want to engage in one; this just raises the hair on my neck.

ppl have an opinion either way. operative word: opinion.

rc will last as long as fiber.
tonal range is the same.
toning ability is the same.
they look the same at the end of the day.
galleries will accept either rc or fiber.

i have yet to hear a compelling argument to use one over the other, outside of the processing times (rc being shorter).

it's a matter of taste, really. try them both and, before you judge either, take it to the presentation stage. matt them both and frame them both. hang on the wall. see a difference? didn't think so.

regardless, find what you like and it will love you back.

 

[motcon]

I'm no expert...

i hear the top reason for printing on fiber is it's archival quality.

According to Will it's warmer than RC.

well, the agfa fiber is much warmer than the agfa rc. this doesn't hold true across the board for all brands, although i personally find the dmin paper white of rc to be brighter than fibers. could be my age. but for agfa it is documented as being so.

 

[terri]

Havoc, my overriding reason for championing FB papers is strictly from a hand colorist's view. It is true that RC papers come in a variety of surfaces now, from canvas to nearly suede-like, all of which pose different challenges when you're processing an image to be hand colored. And manufacturers of RC papers now say they have the same archival qualities. Although I love to play with lots of different mediums, I tend to stick mostly with photo oils, and I get consistently good results with the Agfa 118.