site- LensWork Special Editions

I mentioned this briefly before, but I think it deserves some more explanation.

In this post, Brooks Jensen mentions a wonderful description of the importance of paper in the final print:

"I once interviewed Oliver Gagliani and we talked about the intangible nature of paper qualities. He compared the selection of photo paper to the judgment of a fine violin. The way to determine which violin is best is not based on reputation, not based on price, not based on materials, but based on the instrument’s ability to carry over distance.

Oliver explained it this way: If you take a number of violins outdoors into a field and have someone play them while you listen from a distance, some violins just sound better. Up close they might look the same, and from a close range they might even sound the same. But the better violins have the ability to “carry” so much farther.

Oliver simply applied this thinking to photographic papers, too. Sure, he would measure densities, he would look at all the other characteristics of a paper, but his true test was to look at papers from a distance and see which one “carried” the farthest. He was absolutely right. Some papers, seen from across the room, simply look better even though they may have exactly the same densities, similar paper base, the same shade of white, comparable surface textures, etc.

There is a kind of ethereal presence that some papers have that is discernable if you really look and look carefully, which of course, we photographers do."

...he's discussing this in the context of his testing of a new generation of inkjet papers: Epson Exhibition Fiber, Ilford Galerie Gold Fiber Silk, Hahnemüle Fine Art Glossy, and Harman Glossy Fiber Base AL.

See the whole post here.