Pixiq

Using Ilford Galerie Gold Fibre Silk with Epson 7800 Printer

*UPDATED DEC. 20, 2011

I used the Ilford Gold Fibre Silk for all my prints for the Christmas season (40 prints in various sizes) mostly around 16 x 20 inches, and it continues to please me very much.  I have switched to it for all my fine art work going forward.  See below for the settings that worked out for me with my Epson 7800.  I would have to assume that your settings might turn out differently depending on the firmware, the printer, the drivers etc.  

It doesn't matter whether I use the profile for the paper or the Advanced Black and White Epson Driver - the settings below are what work for me.

Good job Ilford.

* * *

*UPDATED DEC. 9, 2011*

A lot of times you write these using whatever reviews as you're using it for the first time.  I'd like to put a conclusion to this one after printing continuously (except for a few naps) for the last few days with the Ilford Gold Fibre Silk paper and the Epson 7800 inkjet printer.

Results: Fantastic.

Thanks for the original testing papers from John at www.ShadesOfPaper.com

Hard to explain exactly what the subjective word Fantastic means because it is not just the look of the paper, but the ease of use and the fact that it doesn't trap dust and hair as quickly as the previous Epson Exhibition Paper.

'Nough of that.  Any printer worth their salt is going to try the paper themselves, and not just for the fun of it but because they aren't happy with some aspect of their current paper.  So let me tell you the essentials, i.e. the printer settings that have worked best for black and white prints with this paper and the Epson 7800.  Get ready for what I'd call the golden enumeration:

Driver: Advanced Black and White

Number of Pixels per Inch (PPI): 1440

Speed: Fast (bi-directional)

Platen Gap: Wide

Paper Width: 4 (microns)

Paper Type: Premium Glossy Photo Paper (250)

Color Toning: Neutral

Advanced Color Settings / Color Toning: Neutral / Tone: Darker

Now I think that's it.  Just to note, that these are not the recommendations of Ilford.  They recommend Paper Type: Premium Semi-Gloss (250).  And the Advanced settings - those are my own choices.  

I am working from a calibrated monitor.  And as you can see from the screen shots I'm on a mac.  Good luck.  And good hunting.  And if you are using the Advanced Black and White Epson Driver (which I've used for years and found to be very good) make sure that whatever program you're using to print from does not allow the printer to do color management.  You want that done with through the driver.

PREFACE

I usually preface these types of posts by saying that they are not reviews.  What they are is what my experience is like, the pros and cons in this case of switching to a new inkjet paper.  My background:  a decade or two of darkroom printing on graded fibre paper.  

As inkjets were beginning to be used for fine art printing and no one dared call their prints inkjets and called them Giclees instead - I experimented with various inks and papers, mostly in the Epson line.

So let's just say that I may not be an expert printer, though some people accuse me of being just that, but I have been at it for a long time and have made my living selling fine art black and white prints.  So, with that out of the way...

One of the first fine art papers that really hooked me was Crane/Museo Silver Rag.  It was the first paper that I could favorably compare with my darkroom fiber prints.  Then I switched to Epson Silver F Gloss Exhibition because it was brighter - but it also had optical brightners which is sort of a no-no for archival purposes.

Still, when you looked at the number for b&w Epson prints that were kept under UV resistant glass - the numbers were good.  So I stuck with it but it had some annoying characteristics.  One was that it was and is very expensive.  Another was that the surface could easily be marred.  A bit of dust settling on the print before it was completely dry (even after say 15 minutes) could stick and not be removed.  Expensive print has to be reprinted.

Another thing was that every once in a while you'd actually get a bad batch.  Maybe it was crinkled.  Maybe it had a slightly yellow tinge.  It could happen with any paper but it was happening once or twice a year with the Epson paper.  And finally, the surface was prone to flaking.

No, not big giant flakes, just tiny bits of the surface flying off, but enough that someone that has put as much effort into the print as I have is going to be annoyed.  And is gonig to print again.  More money.

So I asked my friends at ShadesOfPaper.com (no I don't get paid for saying that they are great to work with) for some suggestions and they sent three papers.  

Again, no review of the other papers since I decided, either based on price or on look not to use them.  I settled on the Ilford Gold Fibre Silk and ordered a box of 17 x 22 and a box 13 x 19.  17 x 22 inches is a great size because you can do your 16 x 20's on it, but you can quarter it and get four letter-sized pieces.  And of course 13 x 19 is the perfect size for your 12 x 18 prints which is a common size for DSLRs.  

This is the image I used for test purposes because it has a very wide d-max, from pure black to pure white.

TODAY

I am now in full swing printing mode with the new (for me) paper: Ilford Gold Silk Fibre. Previous paper was Epson F Gloss Exhibition paper and before that Crane/Museo Silver Rag with my Epson 7800 Printer.  All test prints are in b&w.

I don't know where in the world they came up with that name. Okay, it is fibre (or as we say fiber) but there's nothing "gold" or "silk" about it. 

I had my troubles with it last night - with some images having a weird greenish tint, and then with two red lines on either side of the paper, and then with a nice smudge on top of the paper where it's gripped at some point --

And all this stuff has to do with what you choose for a) media choice, b) platen gap width and c) paper width

And also what Epson driver you are using. In my case I ended up using the Advanced Black & White driver.

Ilford gives some recommendations for what to use, but they don't give you all the pieces of the puzzle. Or if they do - I couldn't find them all in one place.

Should, for example, the Platen Gap be set to Auto, Wide, Wider, etc.

When you are looking at the various paper types when choosing media - on the Epson for example you'll see Premium Lustre (250), Premium Gloss (250), Premium Semi-Gloss (250)

Ilford recommends using Premium Semi-Gloss. But besides the fact that Premium Lustre works better (FOR ME!) do you know what the (250) means?

I've been using it for years without knowing what that meant and as I had to dig into things to find out what was screwed up I found that its the Micron of the media - i.e. how thick it is.

But now the Ilford paper is thicker than that. So you are told by Epson to choose the Epson 250 and then go to the advanced settings and change the micron width to something else... like 315

But if you actually put in 315 instead of 3 you are really going to get some odd results which is what had me scratching my head.

And it goes on and on until you find that a good number for width is 4 or 5 and a good setting for the Platen Gap is Wide

And for media setting if you are using Advanced Black and White driver Premium Lustre seems to work best in giving a neutral print.

Anyway - what really bothers me - is when I'm looking for the settings and my own question about the settings that's in my blog comes up at the top of the Google search. Did that ever happen to you? 

Is it really such an arcane question?

The reason that it's puzzling and changes is that there's no way of knowing what drivers Ilford used or what drivers I'm using now - when their recommendations were made. It's really nobodies fault - but four or five years ago when Ilford was doing it's testing - with an Epson 7800 and their ICC Profile - let me ask - as I think about it - do you think they had the same Epson driver I'm using?

An even better question, do you think that Ilford has checked their recommendations for Media Type on every printer that's being used or that they have a profile for? I doubt it.

So every time I switch papers - I find myself going through this song and dance which is why I don't change papers very often. In this case though - it is worth the switch because it is much less expensive than the Epson F Gloss - and the surface seems to be much less prone to picking up dust etc. once it's dry.

It dries quickly - but they recommend letting it "cure" for 24 hours to let the vapors out.

And you know what -- speaking of the relationship between paper and printers - paper makers make changes to the formula for their papers. That's what has practically killed Crane/Museo Silver Rag which is a paper that I beta tested a long time ago and loved. Now it is being taken off of printers shelves because of some strange results after the emulsion (if that's what it's called) was changed.

THE RESULTS

The paper doesn't feel as heavy as the Epson Paper F Gloss but it's very subjective.  If you were to put each print in my hand and blindfold me - I don't know if I could tell the difference.

It doesn't have optical brightners.  Good.  It is also not as bright as the Epson printer.  Fine.  It has a very nice "hand."  The feeling of how the surface is put together.  I haven't seen much "glare" and frankly - although the paper is a touch warmer than I'm used to - it has a good look to it.

A funny side-note.  The paper actually smells like the old fiber prints.  Okay, who goes around smelling prints anyway?  I did because I read that because of the Baryta layer beneath the surface you may get a slight odor.

It comes out of the printer and wants to curl a touch.  After fifteen minutes that goes away and the print lies flat.

It dries faster than the Epson F Gloss.  You can drop some dust on it five minutes after it comes out of the printer and then blow them away.  That is truly great.

The paper should be left to "cure" for 24 hours so vapors have a chance to escape.

I'm only at it for 24 hours with this paper, but for the price / value - it is difficult to find a worthy competitor for this paper.  And btw - it is not a new paper. It's been around at least four years.  I like that in a paper.  Get the kinks (bad pun) out.

The problems that I had have nothing at all to do with the paper.  Odds are that I'd have the same issues with any new paper.  So all-in-all (knock wood) I'm happy.  Check back with me in six weeks :)