>
>
> On Tue, 11 May 2004, Don Bryant wrote:
> > I've used Ilford WT MG IV fiber toned in selenium and I don't think the
> look
> > of a VDB is quite comparable.
> >
> > For a comparison look at this photo printed on Ilford WTMGIV toned in
> > selenium:
> >
> > http://www.apgphoto.org/about/portfolio2001/bryant.shtml
> >
> > and compare it to these VDBs printed by Wynn White:
> >
> > http://unblinkingeye.com/Articles/Vandyke/vandyke.html
> >
> > IMO, the highlights in Ilford paper tend to show the effects of the
> toner
> > where as the VDB highlights tend to show the color of the paper base. Of
> > course the warm tones are a different color also.
>
>
> It seems to me that the difference between a VDB on an artists' paper and
> a photograph on silver gelatin (factory) paper, however it's been exposed,
> developed, or toned, is going to be more than can be seen on a monitor.
> The *paramount* difference is the surface, the texture, the tactile effect
> of an emulsion in paper, or ON paper-- right out in the air, mother naked,
> NOT buried in gelatin. It's quite possible to prefer the silver-gelatin
> version, I'm sure some people do, but you can't judge from the monitor
> which only shows phosphor behind glass.
>
My examples given to be viewed on the monitor were intended to demonstrate a
relative difference not an absolute comparison, and since I printed one of
the example prints I can testify that the displayed image is pretty close to
the original.
In all respects a web image is better than no image at all.
My 2 cents,
Don
Received on Tue May 11 20:31:34 2004
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 06/04/04-01:20:53 PM Z CST