Re: Felt vs Wire (was: Re: Stonehenge Paper)

About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

From: Alan Bucknam (alan@notchcode.com)
Date: 01/10/03-10:37:14 AM Z


Katherine,

In strict paper-making terms the "front" is always the felt, or smooth,
side. Some "other" atists, like illustrators and watercolorists, prefer
the back, wire, side, because they favor the tooth. If a paper maker
tools the watermark into the wire so that it's right-reading when
viewed from the wire side, they may want to feature the rougher wire
surface rather than the smooth felt side.

For reference, the Mohawk paper glossary defines Felt side and wire
side as:

Wire Side
The side that is in contact with the wire on the paper machine, as
distinguished from the felt or top side.

Felt-side
The top side of the paper web, which comes in contact with the
papermaking felt.

also of note to paper-geeks:

Machine felt finish
Rubber marking rolls apply a felt-type finish to paper right before the
dryer section. This technique yields a softer surface than embossing,
and better bulk. The surface is slightly harder than with a genuine
felt finish. Though less natural in feel, a machine-felt texture is
more economical and provides greater ink holdout because of its compact
surface. [and, presumably, photographic emulsion would have a greater
tendency to sit more on the top layer of fibers on a paper manufactured
like this. -a.b.]

Genuine felt finish
A finish applied to paper by means of marking felts while the paper web
is still very wet. These felts impart their distinctive textures by
gently rearranging the paper fibers. This creates a soft, resilient,
textured surface suitable for printing and relief operations.

-Alan Bucknam

On Friday, January 10, 2003, at 01:22 AM, Katharine Thayer wrote:

> This brings to mind something I've puzzled about a long time and maybe
> someone can shed some light on it for me. It's always been my
> understanding that the "front" side of the paper is supposed to be the
> side from which the watermark reads the right way. But it also seems to
> me that the "wire" side should be the back side of the paper. I mean,
> who wants a wire pattern in their print? I sure don't. So why is it
> that
> for a lot of papers, the front side is the wire side? When I was using
> Arches aquarelle, I always printed on the back side of the paper for
> that reason. I had to give up Arches for other reasons that aren't
> important here, though I've never found another paper I like as well.
> Now I'm using Fabriano Uno, which is built the same way. The back side
> has too much texture for my needs, so I have to use the front side,
> which is the wire side. The wire texture is fairly small and
> unobtrusive
> in large prints, but sometimes I make contact prints from 4x5 negatives
> and in those, the wire texture becomes distracting. So my question is,
> why isn't the felt side always the front side, as (IMHO) it should be?
> Katharine Thayer
>
>
> Carl Weese wrote:
>>
>> The batch of Stonehenge I've got has a barely discernible difference
>> between
>> wire and felt sides. I've only printed on the smoother side.---Carl
>> --
>> web site with picture galleries
>> and workshop information at:
>>
>> http://home.earthlink.net/~cweese/
>>
>> ----------
>>> From: Eric Neilsen <e.neilsen@worldnet.att.net>
>>> To: alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca
>>> Subject: RE: Stonehenge Paper
>>> Date: Thu, Jan 9, 2003, 7:23 PM
>>>
>>
>>> Jeff, In my early days with this paper there was a definite good
>>> side.
>>> I didn't even think to try it the other way. I am not interested in
>>> overly textured, mottled prints and that is what I saw in the wrong
>>> side.
>>>
>>> Eric Neilsen Photography
>>> 4101 Commerce Street
>


About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : 02/21/03-10:44:16 AM Z CST