Recently I have developed a strong affinity to matte paper.
However it was pointed out to me that matte paper cannot produce as deep a black as gloss paper.
This made me wonder whether matte paper has a decreased tonality or a perceived decrease in tonality.
Do you have any glossy paper? Can't you make two prints and compare them side to side and see which you like best? You don't want to get into a discussion of the perils of reflection densitometry do you?
The nature of the matte surface (which diffuses the reflected light) means that a black as deep as found on glossy paper cannot be obtained. it's not a quality issue, but an esthetic one. A matte paper can have a perfectly believable black, and some workers prefer them. If you want numbers, when i was testing RC papers at Kodak in the 1990s, Kodabrome II RC F (glossy) had a Dmax of about 2.0; Kodabrome II RC N (matte) had a Dmax of about 1.6. (I only quote those remembered numbers for long-discontinued paper to suggest the general relationship.) If you have developed a strong affinity for matte paper, then use matte paper and be happy. We are making pictures, after all, not H&D curves.
Yes I do. And yes I did. Gloss paper absolutely produces a deeper black. I might be interested in that conversation please continue.Originally Posted by ic-racer
The reason I ended up using gloss was purely aesthetic. I find the matte paper to have beautiful subtle qualities in find hard to put into words. However this question was raised because we are conducting some tests on tonality, range, and exposure so the person who brought this up had a very valid reason to want to steer me towards gloss paper. And for the remainder of this test phase we will but I will print my final images on matte. It looks "silky"
Thank you for providing the empirical evidence.
There is another effect that makes matte paper images look dull - when printing on glossy paper dried matte (air dried, usually) on a paper with brighteners, there is a reflective quality that many of us feel is a 'depth'. I have never been able to articulate exactly what its origins are, and it depends upon viewing light, but I swear it is there, and so do my peers of fifty years of photography.
I miss Agfa Brovira graded fiber paper.
.
I don't think matte paper looks dull necesarilly.
Digital matte prints have a special beauty that is absent in glossy prints -- until they are mounted behind glass. Unprotected, that quality can be marred by mishandling.
My experience is only with wet prints. But yes I agree this unquantifiable quality is specially endearing. I have no problem with the way black is represented but it's interesting since until now I had not been made aware of this distinction.
In general, paper surfaces influence the D-Max as demonstrated in this diagram:
However, more specific comparisons are difficult due to the nature of measuring reflected light from a print.
This diagram demonstrates the light available to view or measure a photographic print. We have first-surface reflections, perpendicular reflections from the base and refraction from the gelatin to the air.
That different fiber based paper surfaces can wreak havoc with reflection densitometry is suggested in this graph showing how small changes in angle of measurement can influence the results on obtains with a reflection densitometer:
My opinion is that more information can be gleaned by judging blacks in darkroom produced photographic prints with one's eyes rather than comparisons of reflection densitometry data.
Graphs ©1969 Hollis N. Todd and Richard D. Zakia, Photographic Sensitometry
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks