Ilford Galerie Classicgreenspun.com : LUSENET : Leica Photography : One Thread
OK folks, I shoot Fuji slides, scan with a 4000 dpi film scanner into PhotoShop creating tiff files which are outputed to an Epson 890. Today I tried Ilford Galerie Classic Pearl Inkjet Photo Paper. Finally an inkjet photo paper that looks like photo paper, acts like photo paper, feels like photo paper, and is reasonably priced. I can hardly wait to try the Ilford Galerie Classic Glossy. Those of you who have set up a digital darkroom and haven't tried this product may want to reconsider.
-- Glenn Travis (email@example.com), February 23, 2002
Not a surprise: I have already taken the plunge with essentially the same setup.
Have you tried that combo with B&W or "toned" monochrome?
If so, has it been with the "stock" Epson inks or with the Quad tone or other 3rd party inks.
Naturally I will scan photos taken with the Leica to keep on topic for the Forum.
-- RICHARD ILOMAKI (firstname.lastname@example.org), February 24, 2002.
The four new Ilford Galerie papers have only been out a couple of months, and, IMUHO, are well worth investigating. But watch out, they seem to be selling by the case. As far as inks go, I plan to use only OEM at this present time. The digital darkroom is for color only, since I have a b&w darkroom.
-- Glenn Travis (email@example.com), February 24, 2002.
It's interesting how much peoples' taste in papers varies. I tried that Ilford Pearl, and felt it was a notch below Epson's Premium Semi- Gloss in my 870. I've also tried the sample pack of Lumijet's Presentation papers, and didn't like any of them.
My absolute unchallenged favourite for colour printing is Tetenal's SpectraJet 264 High-Gloss. Prints on that paper look better than Ilfochromes in terms of colour accuracy and saturation, while avoiding all of Ilfochrome's contrast problems.
For a semi-gloss paper I haven't found one yet that I think is better than Epson's offering, though I'm going to try some Tetenal Portrait Pearl on Monday.
One additional note - I've discovered that Epson's Semi-Gloss gives the most neutral B&W prints I've yet seen from the colour inks in the 870 - no duotone magic required. My previous favourite for B&W was their Matte Heavyweight, but I found the Semi-Gloss to be much more neutral.
It's a blast having so many different papers to experiment with. Expensive, but fun :-)
-- Paul Chefurka (firstname.lastname@example.org), February 24, 2002.
my tip is perma jet portrait classic. it is a heavy, watercolor like mould made paper. it is pretty expensive though, about one pound per sheet. but the prints are astonishing. i use a canon 800 and they blow you away. blacks are really black. one problem is that i still haven't found a way to hang them on the wall, because you want to touch them and not hide that stuff behind glass
-- stefan randlkofer (email@example.com), February 24, 2002.
Straight from Ilford(I swear!). Ilford has been making the Epson paper and now they are marketing under their own name. A good move since Ilford is more known to photographers than Epson. The only problem right now is that the new Ilford paper will NOT work with the Epson 2000 printer.
-- chris williams (LeicaChris@worldnet.att.net), February 24, 2002.
Well, I've tried the Tetenal Portrait Pearl, and I've found my new semi-gloss paper for colour printing on my 870. The gamut, saturation and colour accuracy are identical to the Tetenal High- Gloss, and well ahead of the Epson Premium Semi-gloss. It sucks for B&W printing, though - it has a residual purple cast. The Epson Semi- Gloss is still my neutrality champ for b&w using colour inks on the 870.
The only downside of the Tetenal papers is the price. Quality never comes cheap, I guess.
-- Paul Chefurka (firstname.lastname@example.org), February 25, 2002.
Paul: I've used the Tetenal with an Epson 600 (4 color) printer - try using the "glossy film" setting instead of 'glossy paper' - then use Epson's 'Advanced settings' in the page setup to dial out any remaining color cast (I use a +3 yellow, but it seems to vary a little from paper batch to paper batch so YMMV)
It's not perfect, but it's better than anything else I've used including the Ilford Pearl - which runs kind of flat and gray in the mid-tones with my printer.
And the Tet certainly does better than "suck" with those settings. I'm busy redoing my whole portfolio on it.
And I'm glad the paper makers are getting their acts together. Although actually the basic Epson glossy phto paper looks the most like traditional glossy fiber paper dried matte. While the "pearl" surfaces look the way RC paper was SUPPOSED to look, but never did.
-- Andy Piper (email@example.com), February 26, 2002.
Just my 2 cents, but I've recently done some prints off of an Epson 1280 onto Ilford Galerie Smooth Gloss paper and I was shocked at how accurate the colors were compared to what I saw on the screen (images shot on Provia and Sensia, scanned with a Nikon LS-8000, only dodging and buring in Photoshop). The only problem I have is what sometimes appears to the an inconsistent finish on the paper itself. But from actual viewing distance, the prints look gorgeous. Very nearly as nice as a good Type R, but far less expensive and just as sharp from 18 inches away.
-- Wayne C. Lee (firstname.lastname@example.org), February 28, 2002.