«

Which Epson paper (or aftermarket brand) comes closest to traditional F
surface black and white paper?

Viperdoc wrote:
> Which Epson paper (or aftermarket brand) comes closest to traditional F
> surface black and white paper?
>
>

Why Ilford Galerie Smooth - of course. If you want inkjet paper that is
like photo-sensitive paper, go with the company that made/makes both.

What is "F surface" B&W paper? I had a B&W wet darkroom for many years,
but never heard that term. I printed on a lot of different papers, but
did use Ilford more than most. There were a lot of surfaces.

In my experience, I would say that most smooth/glossy inkjet papers look
and feel like RC papers of yore. Even the luster/pearl/semi gloss feel
like their counterparts in RC.

To get something like the fiber papers of yesteryear, you need to look
at the "fine art" inkjet papers. Of course, there were a lot of fiber
papers in the old days and there are certainly a lot of different fine
art papers today. Matching them all up would be a long and interesting
process.

You might want to go to: http://inkjetart.com/ They are a great
reference on any kind of inkjet printing. They have a ton of different
papers with good descriptions of them. (Heck, they even have cloth you
can print on if you really want "fiber".) I pretty much buy everything
from them. Their prices are pretty good and their service is great.
Highly recommended. BTW, they lean very much toward Epson. Epson does
have some nice fine art papers too.

My experience with the fine art papers is that you really have to try
them on your printer. Mileage will vary considerably. Luckily they sell
sample kits too.

Clyde

Clyde <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:

> Viperdoc wrote:
>> Which Epson paper (or aftermarket brand) comes closest to
>> traditional F surface black and white paper?
>
> Why Ilford Galerie Smooth - of course. If you want inkjet paper that
> is like photo-sensitive paper, go with the company that made/makes
> both.
>
> What is "F surface" B&W paper? I had a B&W wet darkroom for many
> years, but never heard that term. I printed on a lot of different
> papers, but did use Ilford more than most. There were a lot of
> surfaces.

Wow. You must be young :-).

"F" surface was the basic glossy photo paper. In fiber-based paper,
you had to squeegee it onto ferrotype plates to get the good glossy
surface -- but when you did so, it was much better than any RC glossy
I've ever seen. Lots of people also like the "glossy dried mat"
finnish.

Um, if you don't know what "F" was, how could you give an answer on
what the equivalent for inkjets is?

> In my experience, I would say that most smooth/glossy inkjet papers
> look and feel like RC papers of yore. Even the luster/pearl/semi gloss
> feel like their counterparts in RC.

Which is to say, inferior. RC paper never really did get perfected.
--
David Dyer-Bennet, <mailto:dd-(E-Mail Removed)>, <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/>
RKBA: <http://noguns-nomoney.com/> <http://www.dd-b.net/carry/>
Pics: <http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/> <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/>
Dragaera/Steven Brust: <http://dragaera.info/>

Correct- I was looking for the equivalent of non-ferrotyped F surface fiber
paper in an ink jet paper, equivalent to double weight. My plan is to do
black and white digital prints, and then print them on high quality fiber
based paper that didn't have the texture or plastic shine of RC papers.

David Dyer-Bennet wrote:
> Clyde <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
>
>
>>Viperdoc wrote:
>>
>>>Which Epson paper (or aftermarket brand) comes closest to
>>>traditional F surface black and white paper?
>>
>>Why Ilford Galerie Smooth - of course. If you want inkjet paper that
>>is like photo-sensitive paper, go with the company that made/makes
>>both.
>>
>>What is "F surface" B&W paper? I had a B&W wet darkroom for many
>>years, but never heard that term. I printed on a lot of different
>>papers, but did use Ilford more than most. There were a lot of
>>surfaces.
>
>
> Wow. You must be young :-).
>
> "F" surface was the basic glossy photo paper. In fiber-based paper,
> you had to squeegee it onto ferrotype plates to get the good glossy
> surface -- but when you did so, it was much better than any RC glossy
> I've ever seen. Lots of people also like the "glossy dried mat"
> finnish.
>
> Um, if you don't know what "F" was, how could you give an answer on
> what the equivalent for inkjets is?
>
>
>>In my experience, I would say that most smooth/glossy inkjet papers
>>look and feel like RC papers of yore. Even the luster/pearl/semi gloss
>>feel like their counterparts in RC.
>
>
> Which is to say, inferior. RC paper never really did get perfected.

Thank you; I'm 48 years old and have only been doing B&W since the early
1970s. So, I've printed on plenty of fiber based B&W paper; with all
degrees of gloss. I never thought of the "fiber" quality as being on the
surface of the paper. And, no, I have never heard the term "F surface".
I have used a squeegee on these prints too.

I don't pretend to know everything about anything. I also don't think
that is a requirement to trying to help out someone in a newsgroup. I
assumed that 30 years of experience in wet darkrooms that I translated
to the dry darkroom might be useful to the questioner. I figured that
he/she was looking for information on papers that would be as close to
light sensitive B&W fiber papers. Yes, my answer was maybe more general
than it ideally could have been. However, it still seems to be the only
answer given. That includes you who claim to know all about this, but
didn't answer the question.

I'm certainly not in a position to judge whether RC paper was/is
inferior to anything. It certainly seems to be a style issue and NOT an
absolute. I guess I'm more tolerant. I do know that RC was WAY more
popular than fiber paper. Sometimes the "market" really does decide what
is "better".

Of course, there are those who believe the only proper B&W is on
platinum. I think that any narrow-minded, intolerant view in any
artistic medium is self limiting and creatively constricting.

Clyde