How are you Spotting Ilford MGFB paper

[Drew Wiley]

India ink will stand out like a sore thumb unless it's just an extremely small spot. It has sheen to it. You can get micro-pens containing it, and it is deep black if you want that. I wouldn't take Edward Weston as any standard of how to do things right. He trimmed his prints with a big pair of scissors, and any of his retouching using ink and gum arabic is pretty darn obvious. But dust spots on contact prints look small to begin with, and the expectations back then weren't quite what they are now. That's not why EW is famous as a photographer. If someone is printing for a museum, they should check with that museum's conservator first, not just wing it.

[ASA1000]

I spot everything with watercolors.

How does the surface reflection look when you look at it on an angle? That's the problem I have with Grumbacher water-retouch colors.

[Drew Wiley]

That's why you need real retouching penetrating dyes, made for this specific purpose. Anything ink or Grumbacher-wise, or watercolor pigment, is going to cause reflection anomalies atop a gelatin surface.

[Pieter]

That's why you need real retouching penetrating dyes, made for this specific purpose. Anything ink or Grumbacher-wise, or watercolor pigment, is going to cause reflection anomalies atop a gelatin surface.

Plus, the spotting remains water-soluble. Maybe a good thing or not.

[nolindan]

Spotone - still have enough left to see me out. Too bad about my lifetime supply of Kodachrome.

[ASA1000]

India ink will stand out like a sore thumb unless it's just an extremely small spot. It has sheen to it. You can get micro-pens containing it, and it is deep black if you want that. I wouldn't take Edward Weston as any standard of how to do things right. He trimmed his prints with a big pair of scissors, and any of his retouching using ink and gum arabic is pretty darn obvious. But dust spots on contact prints look small to begin with, and the expectations back then weren't quite what they are now. That's not why EW is famous as a photographer. If someone is printing for a museum, they should check with that museum's conservator first, not just wing it.

Thanks Drew
That matte finish ink I posted a picture of is excellent, it os barely distinguishable in a bright side light, let alone straight on. So far I'm pleased with that on the prints I am making. As far as the conservator... she's involved in some project until later this month so I'm coming up with 'options'. I know, on the back, the want any notes to be in nothing but #2 pencil.

[Ray Marrero]

I've been using Spotone for 35 years with all FB papers and zero complaints.

[Louie Powell]

Same here - and from the same bottles - the stuff lasts forever if you use it right.

I was taught how to spot by David Vestal who was a real master of that skill. His technique was to use an old porcelain saucer as a pallatte - he would put a drop of each dye on the sauce and let it dry. Then, when he needed to spot a print, he would moisten a fine brush with water, and use it to pick up a bit of that dried dye. When one of the blobs of dried dye was exhausted, he replaced it. But the result was that he used only microscopic amounts of dye in each spotting session.

The other thing he taught me was to use a pair of high-diopter reading glasses (from the drug store) as magnifiers. Unfortunately, as I have gotten older, those magnifiers have now become my standard readers.

[Tin Can]

Why are so many NEEDING spotting on paper?

Are your films bad?

dust from shooting in dust?

dirty DDS?

Lenses are never the problem

Scanning?

[Greg]

Gamma Retouch kit