Topic: A change of heart -Ilford MG ART 300

[LT]

I know I'm in a minority here in that I go the whole hog as far as analogue photographic image making is concerned (i.e. I print proper prints), but I thought I'd share an epiphany I've experienced today.

A while ago, I posted a review of the new Ilford Hahnemuhle collaboration paper. I wasn't really impressed.

But I've spent the day printing today, and I've formed a new relationship with this paper.  I printed more delicately, sorted out my dry down factor, and have made what I think are my best prints for about  3 years.  It's great! No toning either, it seems to love the Harman Warmtone developer by itself. I just wish I could afford it in proper sizes.  I'd love to get some 16x12 prints of my LF negs going.

I take it all back.  It is superb.

[Phil Bebbington]

I think that there is often mileage in revisiting things - this is great, Leon.

[mickld]

Glad to hear it. Hate to think one of the few new papers released was a dud. You were quite specific in the original review as to what you didn't like about it first time round. Is it possible to be as specific as to why you now like it? Other than dry down which you've already mentioned, of course.  It's quite expensive and unfortunately they only seem to sell 8x10s in packs of 50, which makes it quite an investment if you only want to test it out..

[LT]

Hi Mick

It is an entirely subjective thing, but I like the effect it has upon certain pictures.  It won't work for everything.  Record shots or street photography are unlikely to benefit from using this paper, I would suggest, although maybe portraits would work quite well - depending on the style etc.

It's about careful control of the tones for - it won't work with muddy tones, at all.  And shadows need to be quite open and high in detail, otherwise they get lost in the sheen.

I think the paper also either benefits from images that are either entirely impressionist in their blur, or alternatively biting sharp - any in-betweens look wrong somehow.

that probably doesn't give you anything tangible to go on, but it's hard to explain fully my change of mind.

[Jon Butler]

I did think it a bit strange when you said you were not keen on the paper.
Your right about in saying that the paper is not for general use, it's what it says on the box its an art paper.

I've found it's not aways the best choice for small prints as you'll lose detail because of the texture.
The bigger you print it the better it gets, I've done some 16x20s and they were beautiful.
J.

[Karl]

Hi Mick

I think the paper also either benefits from images that are either entirely impressionist in their blur.

Like a decent Holga neg?