RC advocates please chime in

[jbenedict]

Given my choice, I'd always use straight grade fiber based paper, preferably Oriental G (in the blue box, not the stuff with the big black circle on the front of the box). Or Ilford Gallerie straight grade fiber based.
These days, however, unless one does alternative processes and makes the materials, we don't have a huge choice in materials. For proofing and photos which aren't intended to be "fine art" RC multigrade is fine. Fiber based multigrade will have to do for everything else.

[Michael R]

Thanks, but I have no interest in printing on plastic. L

Well, there is paper inside the plastic, and the emulsion sits on top of the plastic so technically you`re not printing on plastic.

[Tin Can]

I primarily print RC now-a-days. 20 years ago I printed only FB from enlarged 35mm. All prints still look great. 2 words. Auto Focus.

At that time I used a small college darkroom with a huge rotary print wash tank, it was fed barrels of 60 F water. Endless hot water. I washed my prints after all other users and pulled them at 1 hour. In the meantime I cleaned the drying screens. I knew most users were sloppy. I also mixed fresh chems every session from buckets of dry.


Now, with LF, I shoot worse negatives than I did then, so I print on RC, for 3 reasons. I like a short water wash cycle when I'm paying for a water heater. It's so fast to process through wash it feels like Polaroid. My prints look great to me and I know RC prints will outlast me.

I don't like glossy anything, not FB, RC or Ink Jet. I use Pearl or Satin. See below for exception.


But I do have 800 sheets of 8x10 AZO SW FB grade 2 & 3, which will be used this summer, from July to October when Chicago tap will range from 60 to 70 degrees. No water heater needed.

And I have plenty of modern FB once I take a great negative...


For me it's a question of water. How much do you have? How much will you pay for it?

[RodinalDuchamp]

Has anyone actually encountered a collector or curator that will pay more for a fiber print? Or has anyone ever successfully sold an RC print but at a reduced price solely because it was on RC and not the craftsmanship technical or artistic merit?

[Michael R]

Rodinal: It probably comes up relatively rarely in B&W fine art because most people (including all the big names I can think of) seem to prefer printing on FB paper for its tactile/surface qualities and dry mounting). But consider fine art colour prints. Those are all done on RC or Polyester paper.

I think unless one has no choice, it is best to simply print on whatever type of paper looks best to the printer.

[Jon Shiu]

Are there any RC papers with a nice surface that doesn't look cheap and plasticky? (Note: I also thought Kodak Polymax Fiber Glossy surface looked like a crummy RC surface because of the texture.)

Jon

[pdh]

Are there any RC papers with a nice surface that doesn't look cheap and plasticky?

Jon

If you can get fotospeed rc "oyster" finish in the US, give it a try.

[papercam]

I have been making paper negatives on a variety of RC and FB papers for maybe 25 years. I have RC prints that are 35 years old that look as good now as the day they dried. I have had "de-silvered" RC prints too, but I learned it was because RC papers "outgas" , if that is the right term, they were under-glass, and these gases cause de-silvering. If i am not mistaken, Kodak, Wilhelm and Ctien did extensive "archivability" tests on RC paper it according to their tests, if RC papers are processed correctly they might last at least as long as FB prints, if the R (resin) stays stable. I like being able to expose a negative or print, and wash it and have it dry in a short amount of time. It's convenient.

[RodinalDuchamp]

I like your empirical approach.

Generally I find that some people swear RC has an inferior latitude which makes prints appear less subtle. But then again I also know some people that as has been stated here already say they are quite comparable.

[Anthony Oresteen]

I love RC paper. I use it for all my contacts, postcards, and 8x10's that I give out. For 11x14, 12x16, 16x20, & 20x24 prints it is strictly FB paper. My choice is Ilford Multigrade IV.

I contact print all my negatives on 8.5" x 11" paper. It only comes in RC from Ilford in that size. Right tool for the job. Case closed.

This is the same argument - oil based paint vs latex based paint. Which is better? Depends on the job.


I have Ilford RC prints (both dry-mounted & un-mounted) that I made in 1982-84 that have not faded or peeled or lost their luster. They still look great.