Re: Ilford Gallerie Pearl - Quick Review
Inkjet printing is a great option for color. Better than wet prints in many ways. However, the wet darkroom is still far superior for B&W. Paul "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" wrote: > > Basically.. > 1) MG IV RC paper - I only use it in the one darkroom I rent (I consider > going to wet but haven't yet - hmm.. that rhymes don't it) which happens to > be a "dry" darkroom (i.e. no trays.. a machine process). > > Yes technically it could still be called wet because chemicals are involved > but I never see them.. even when the print gets spit out of the machine. > > 2) The weight and texture between the two papers (MG IV and Gallerie Pearl > Inkjet) is nearly identical to my hands and eyes. > > 3) I don't necessarily like the inkjet prints over the "wet" prints because > they're different beasts in my eyes. The inkjet, until they get the blacks > correct and can create true B&W will always lend itself better to say.. > sepia or a blue-grey version of B&W as compared to doing things the old > fashioned way (in the darkroom). The reason I say that I would use the > paper for "good" work was mainly due to costs - ink and paper - which can > add up when doing full bleed (or close to it) 90% coverage. > > If I break down the costs: > 100 sheets Ilford Gallerie Pearl - $79.99 CDN > 100 sheets Ilford MG IV Pearl - $29.99 CDN > Darkroom time - $10.00/hour > Inks - Epson Color - $29.99 CDN > - Epson Black - $36.99 CDN > > I guess I'd have to do a more "in depth" analysis to find out if the extra > cost of the Gallerie Pearl is offset by not having to pay for darkroom time > :) > > Cheers, > Dave > > Original Message: > - > From: tom [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 11:46:31 -0400 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: Ilford Gallerie Pearl - Quick Review > > > -Original Message- > > From: David Chang-Sang [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > > When I said I was comparing it to MG IV - I was comparing > > the Gallerie Pearl > > to their line of REAL photo paper (i.e. NON inkjet - > > darkroom based photo > > paper). > > Are your saying you like your inkjet prints better than your wet > prints? You didn't make any specific comparison, but you said "It is > now going to be the paper to print GOOD work on." > > tv > > > mail2web - Check your email from the web at > http://mail2web.com/ .
RE: Ilford Gallerie Pearl - Quick Review
Basically.. 1) MG IV RC paper - I only use it in the one darkroom I rent (I consider going to wet but haven't yet - hmm.. that rhymes don't it) which happens to be a "dry" darkroom (i.e. no trays.. a machine process). Yes technically it could still be called wet because chemicals are involved but I never see them.. even when the print gets spit out of the machine. 2) The weight and texture between the two papers (MG IV and Gallerie Pearl Inkjet) is nearly identical to my hands and eyes. 3) I don't necessarily like the inkjet prints over the "wet" prints because they're different beasts in my eyes. The inkjet, until they get the blacks correct and can create true B&W will always lend itself better to say.. sepia or a blue-grey version of B&W as compared to doing things the old fashioned way (in the darkroom). The reason I say that I would use the paper for "good" work was mainly due to costs - ink and paper - which can add up when doing full bleed (or close to it) 90% coverage. If I break down the costs: 100 sheets Ilford Gallerie Pearl - $79.99 CDN 100 sheets Ilford MG IV Pearl - $29.99 CDN Darkroom time - $10.00/hour Inks - Epson Color - $29.99 CDN - Epson Black - $36.99 CDN I guess I'd have to do a more "in depth" analysis to find out if the extra cost of the Gallerie Pearl is offset by not having to pay for darkroom time :) Cheers, Dave Original Message: - From: tom [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 11:46:31 -0400 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Ilford Gallerie Pearl - Quick Review > -Original Message- > From: David Chang-Sang [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > When I said I was comparing it to MG IV - I was comparing > the Gallerie Pearl > to their line of REAL photo paper (i.e. NON inkjet - > darkroom based photo > paper). Are your saying you like your inkjet prints better than your wet prints? You didn't make any specific comparison, but you said "It is now going to be the paper to print GOOD work on." tv mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ .
RE: Ilford Gallerie Pearl - Quick Review
> -Original Message- > From: David Chang-Sang [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > When I said I was comparing it to MG IV - I was comparing > the Gallerie Pearl > to their line of REAL photo paper (i.e. NON inkjet - > darkroom based photo > paper). Are your saying you like your inkjet prints better than your wet prints? You didn't make any specific comparison, but you said "It is now going to be the paper to print GOOD work on." tv
Re: Ilford Gallerie Pearl - Quick Review
Yes I was referring to the inkjet series. You'll love it Vic
Re: RE: Ilford Gallerie Pearl - Quick Review
David. I was at Henrys Newmarket and saw they had a sample pack of the 4 Ilford Glossy papers,for $8.99 so i snagged one to try this week.It sounds like Epson printers have more paper options than the Canon drivers,but hopefully there is not much difference between papers so the S800 won't get to confused Dave Begin Original Message From: "tom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 00:51:55 -0400 To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: Ilford Gallerie Pearl - Quick Review > -Original Message- > From: David Chang-Sang [mailto:david@chang- sang.com] > > > Seeing as how the PDML is not really fully back up (i.e. if > you try to > respond to this you'll probably only respond directly to me > and not to the > list) I figure I'll post an OT item: If you hit "reply-all" it seems to work ok. > > I snagged 25 sheets of Ilford Gallerie Pearl paper from > Henry's in Toronto > today (my sales guy gave me a bit of a break on it.. $18.00 > CDN plus tax) - > > I was eager to see how it compares to Ilford's line of > Multigrade RC photo > paper (specifically MG IV .44 Pearl) I'm confused. Ilford makes both inkjet and conventional paper called Galerie. I'm guessing you were comparing the inkjet Galerie to conventional MG? tv End Original Message Pentax User Stouffville Ontario Canada http://home.ca.inter.net/brooksdj/ http://brooks1952.tripod.com/myhorses Sign up today for your Free E-mail at: http://www.canoe.ca/CanoeMail
RE: Ilford Gallerie Pearl - Quick Review
Actually, at the time I posted it Tom - hitting reply-all didn't work. Same thing happened to Frank, so I knew it wasn't a "user" problem :) When I said I was comparing it to MG IV - I was comparing the Gallerie Pearl to their line of REAL photo paper (i.e. NON inkjet - darkroom based photo paper). Hope this clarifies things, Cheers, Dave -Original Message- From: tom [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2002 12:52 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Ilford Gallerie Pearl - Quick Review > -Original Message- > From: David Chang-Sang [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Seeing as how the PDML is not really fully back up (i.e. if > you try to > respond to this you'll probably only respond directly to me > and not to the > list) I figure I'll post an OT item: If you hit "reply-all" it seems to work ok. > > I snagged 25 sheets of Ilford Gallerie Pearl paper from > Henry's in Toronto > today (my sales guy gave me a bit of a break on it.. $18.00 > CDN plus tax) - > > I was eager to see how it compares to Ilford's line of > Multigrade RC photo > paper (specifically MG IV .44 Pearl) I'm confused. Ilford makes both inkjet and conventional paper called Galerie. I'm guessing you were comparing the inkjet Galerie to conventional MG? tv
RE: Ilford Gallerie Pearl - Quick Review
Jeff, I too will be getting the 2450 in due time for my MF stuff. Currently this is the 35mm stuff (you know.. the Pentax LX stuff *smirk*) that I am scanning with the Minolta Dimage Scan Elite II. :) Cheers, Dave -Original Message- From: Jeff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, August 26, 2002 11:18 PM To: David Chang-Sang; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Ilford Gallerie Pearl - Quick Review Dave, what do you use as a scanner? I have the same printer, but my negs won't fit into the HP S20. I need a 2450, soon! Jeff - Original Message - From: "David Chang-Sang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, August 26, 2002 11:13 PM Subject: OT: Ilford Gallerie Pearl - Quick Review > Seeing as how the PDML is not really fully back up (i.e. if you try to > respond to this you'll probably only respond directly to me and not to the > list) I figure I'll post an OT item: > > I snagged 25 sheets of Ilford Gallerie Pearl paper from Henry's in Toronto > today (my sales guy gave me a bit of a break on it.. $18.00 CDN plus tax) - > > I was eager to see how it compares to Ilford's line of Multigrade RC photo > paper (specifically MG IV .44 Pearl) > > Out of the box, weight wise, it's about the same as the MG IV. In my hands, > I can't tell the difference save that the Galerie Gloss is 8.5x11 and the MG > IV is 8x10. > > Instructions leave you with little doubt how to get the best results out of > printing on your photo printer. > I scanned in http://www.chang-sang.com/photos/bike_crop.jpg which was taken > in July at a TOPUG meeting - HP5 plus > > I printed using the Epson 870 and adjusted as per instructions (1440 DPI > and -6 magenta to reduce cast). > > From my standpoint, it is an awesome paper. > It is now going to be the paper to print GOOD work on. > Epson Heavyweight Matte will always be there.. as will their premium glossy > paper but for Pearl, I'll be sticking with the Ilford Gallerie. Aaron did > say he should have more in soon.. and compartively speaking, his prices for > the 100 sheet box are a bit cheaper than Henry's. Aaron's is $79.99 for 100 > sheets vs Henry's $22.99 for 25 sheets resulting in 0.80 per sheet vs 0.92 > per sheet respectively. Henry's, as far as I know, does not carry the 100 > sheet amounts. > > Cheers, > Dave >
RE: Ilford Gallerie Pearl - Quick Review
> -Original Message- > From: David Chang-Sang [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Seeing as how the PDML is not really fully back up (i.e. if > you try to > respond to this you'll probably only respond directly to me > and not to the > list) I figure I'll post an OT item: If you hit "reply-all" it seems to work ok. > > I snagged 25 sheets of Ilford Gallerie Pearl paper from > Henry's in Toronto > today (my sales guy gave me a bit of a break on it.. $18.00 > CDN plus tax) - > > I was eager to see how it compares to Ilford's line of > Multigrade RC photo > paper (specifically MG IV .44 Pearl) I'm confused. Ilford makes both inkjet and conventional paper called Galerie. I'm guessing you were comparing the inkjet Galerie to conventional MG? tv
Re: Ilford Gallerie Pearl - Quick Review
Dave, what do you use as a scanner? I have the same printer, but my negs won't fit into the HP S20. I need a 2450, soon! Jeff - Original Message - From: "David Chang-Sang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, August 26, 2002 11:13 PM Subject: OT: Ilford Gallerie Pearl - Quick Review > Seeing as how the PDML is not really fully back up (i.e. if you try to > respond to this you'll probably only respond directly to me and not to the > list) I figure I'll post an OT item: > > I snagged 25 sheets of Ilford Gallerie Pearl paper from Henry's in Toronto > today (my sales guy gave me a bit of a break on it.. $18.00 CDN plus tax) - > > I was eager to see how it compares to Ilford's line of Multigrade RC photo > paper (specifically MG IV .44 Pearl) > > Out of the box, weight wise, it's about the same as the MG IV. In my hands, > I can't tell the difference save that the Galerie Gloss is 8.5x11 and the MG > IV is 8x10. > > Instructions leave you with little doubt how to get the best results out of > printing on your photo printer. > I scanned in http://www.chang-sang.com/photos/bike_crop.jpg which was taken > in July at a TOPUG meeting - HP5 plus > > I printed using the Epson 870 and adjusted as per instructions (1440 DPI > and -6 magenta to reduce cast). > > From my standpoint, it is an awesome paper. > It is now going to be the paper to print GOOD work on. > Epson Heavyweight Matte will always be there.. as will their premium glossy > paper but for Pearl, I'll be sticking with the Ilford Gallerie. Aaron did > say he should have more in soon.. and compartively speaking, his prices for > the 100 sheet box are a bit cheaper than Henry's. Aaron's is $79.99 for 100 > sheets vs Henry's $22.99 for 25 sheets resulting in 0.80 per sheet vs 0.92 > per sheet respectively. Henry's, as far as I know, does not carry the 100 > sheet amounts. > > Cheers, > Dave >
