Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Printing: Printers, Papers and Inks => Topic started by: Quintin Lake on January 13, 2011, 09:58:55 am
-
Having purchased a few hundred sheets of A2 size Hahnemühle photo rag 308 over the past year I finally cant stomach any longer the high cost at the rate i'm printing! I love the matte look, texture and rigidity. I primarily print colour at A2 size on the Epson 3800. Does a chapter alternative exist that maintains 90% of the quality of this paper or it this really the only choice for this quality and longevity.
Its been a few years since I last researched matte fine art papers so apologies if this has been discussed elsewhere (but if so I'd appreciate a pointer)
Many thanks
Quintin
-
Epson Hot Press Natural might be a good alternative for you.
-
Quintin,
give Moab Entrada Natural Rag a try. I compared the two papers, and many others, about a year ago, to find "my" papers. On HP Vivera inks I liked the Moab better. It is less expensive than the Hahnemühle (and double sided).
Thomas
-
Thanks for the suggestions.
I should have mentioned i'm in the UK. The Moab paper seems a lot cheaper and if you preferred it to Hahne seems a good choice. These are the best prices I could find in the UK
Moab Entrada Rag Bright 300 25 Sheets Colour Confidence (https://shop.colourconfidence.com/product.php?xProd=2430&xSec=10449
https://shop.colourconfidence.com/product.php?xProd=2430&xSec=10449)
£65.05
Photo Rag 308 gsm A2 25 Sheets Silverprint (http://www.silverprint.co.uk/ProductByGroup.asp?PrGrp=3020)
£91.15
Epson Hot Press Natural Paper (330gsm) A2, 25 Sheets Imaging Expert (http://www.imaging-expert.co.uk/products/epson-hot-press-natural-paper-330gsm-a2-25-sheets-offer-price-to-31-mar-10-p-7840.html?currency=GBP)
£94.69
Any other suggestions - is there anything out there even cheaper!?
-
I was going to suggest the Moab Somerset Museum Rag (my review is at http://www.danecreekfolios.com/blog/2010/7/7/moab-somerset-museum-rag-paper-review.html), but I checked Moab's site and it doesn't list it in an A2 size. Of course that may be because I was the USA site?
At any rate, it's an awesome matte paper.
Neil
-
I second this. However, be aware that this is a very dusty paper. I brush the paper with a fine horse hair paintbrush before printing on it. Otherwise, I get lots of white specks.
For a smoother surface, I particularly like Red River Polar matte. It works a treat on B&W. It's not a rag paper, but a very good cellulosic paper.
Quintin,
give Moab Entrada Natural Rag a try. I compared the two papers, and many others, about a year ago, to find "my" papers. On HP Vivera inks I liked the Moab better. It is less expensive than the Hahnemühle (and double sided).
Thomas
-
Hi
I would recommend Fotospeed High White Smooth as an effective lower cost alternative to the Photo Rag. Speak to Fotospeed directly quoting your volume and if you are prepared to bulk up your orders a little they will give a good price. BTW they are a British company.
http://www.fotospeed.com/High-White-Smooth-Fine-Art-Photo-Paper---315gsm/products/2005/
David
-
Have a look at Somerset Velvet. Lighter than Photo rag, but still a good feel, much cheaper too.
If you can get to Silverprint during working hours they have samples of all their papers to browse through, so maybe worth the trip.
Another place to see, handle and get samples of all of the major brands in the UK is the Focus on Imaging at the NEC next month. If you register now it should be free to get in and it's less than an hour from Oxford (just the NEC rip you off eight quid to park).
Paul
-
Check some of the papers mentioned here on how well they cope with inks and how their paper white holds in time. Photorag does that very good according to Aardenburg Imaging. If that isn't a criterion then much cheaper options are possible.
met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst Dinkla
Try: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/
-
[..]
Another place to see, handle and get samples of all of the major brands in the UK is the Focus on Imaging at the NEC next month.
[..]
It's on from 6-9th March. Well worth a visit.
Anthony.
-
What about this - ILFORD GALERIE GOLD FIBRE SILK?
-
What about this - ILFORD GALERIE GOLD FIBRE SILK?
It is not a matte paper which is the subject of this thread.
-
Hi Quintin,
I'm in the Los Angeles area but I thought I should offer up my recent experience as you are in the same spot I was about 2 years ago. I print on an Epson 3800 and 9800 and produce fine art editions for several artists showing in museums and galleries around the world. I started trying various paper samples looking for an OBA-free alternative to the Photo Rag, as it does state in the specs that it has some. And of course I also wanted a lower price. I settled on the MOAB Entrada Rag Natural. I've used both the 290 and the 300 gsm, depending on the availability and price. Occasionally I find the double-sided 300 on sale and it ends up costing less than the single-sided 290, but not often. I only need single-sided anyhow.
In the past 2 years, I've used the Entrada Natural paper almost exclusively. I really love this paper and so do my clients. I print mostly warm-tone black and white images, but have also used the Entrada to produce some gorgeous color prints from old Kodachromes. I have experienced very little (negligable) amounts of the dust spots mentioned in another post. No more so than with any other matte surface fine art paper. I usually spot them with a Conte charcoal pencil.
For my comparisons I printed the same images on Entrada and Photo Rag and found the blacks to be a bit richer on the Entrada. This is printing through Photoshop and using profiles provided by the manufacturers. I sometimes use Colorburst RIP with other papers and tried the Colorburst profile for Entrada but wasn't happy with it. The profile provided by MOAB was so good that I haven't bothered to try adjusting the CB profile. Of the OBA-free papers, MOAB Entrada has been the closest in base tone and surface quality that I can find to Photo Rag and I feel the image reproduces better on Entrada. The Photo Rag base appears just a tiny bit brighter, perhaps because of OBA's present? I'm not sure as it's just from my observation, not through any measurement.
Hope this helps in your search and that MOAB paper is available where you are at a reasonable price should you choose to use it. Happy printing!
Althea
-
Quintin,
The new Epson Hot Press Natural produces a better black than the older Entrada Bright that I tested, and even slightly better than the prior matte black "leader" in my tests, Epson Velvet Fine Art (see my recently revised paper inking tests in the technical section of my website, http://www.dygartphotography.com (http://www.dygartphotography.com)). Although I still need to retest some of the newer Entrada papers, the Hot Press paper produces a significantly better d/max than the Hahnemuhle Fine Art Photo Rag 308. The sheet color is slightly brighter than the Hahnemuhle, the surface is very similar, and it's a nice thick 100% cotton rag sheet. Of course, papers have different response curves and different personalities, so the numbers may not be your final determining factors, but they are a good way to start your evaluations.
Aloha,
Aaron
-
Those of you using the Entrada Rag really do have to give the Moab Somerset Museum Rag a try. It's really very nice!
Neil
-
...than the older Entrada Bright that I tested...
Aaron,
thanks a lot for sharing your paper tests on your website.
What do you mean by the "older" Entrada. Which of its characteristic did changed and when?
Thomas
-
Thomas,
The only thing I meant was that the test was was made before Moab became a Legion brand paper in new packaging. I don't know whether it is the same now as it was then or not, as I've not ordered any Entrada. I've recently tested the Moab Somerset Museum Rag 300 and Enhanced Velvet 225 in the newer packaging. I'll see if I can get some newer samples of Entrada papers to retest.
Aloha,
Aaron
-
Those of you using the Entrada Rag really do have to give the Moab Somerset Museum Rag a try. It's really very nice!
Neil
I recently bought a some of this to try out after reading so much good buzz about it, but I'm a bit disappointed. The sheets I bought come out of the box flat but quickly develop curl at both ends, this paper is also quite 'flimsy', considerably less stiff than Photo Rag (probably partly responsible for the curling). With Luxia Ex inks, DMax is not quite as good as Photo Rag 308, but gamut is otherwise very similar. The texture is OK but a little too directional, if that makes sense.
So far I have yet to find anything that truly meets or exceeds the look/feel and performance of Photo Rag. To me it has just the right amount of texture, and the DMax and gamut are excellent. The fact that it's a fairly well-known entity with regards to permanence is also reassuring (last time I checked HPR with Lucia inks was still the permanence champ in the AA&I database).
The Epson Hot Press may be next for me to look at. I tried the Cold Press at one point, wanting to try something with a little more texture. In the end I decided the texture was too much, but the DMax and gamut were excellent (only matte paper I've tried that beat Photo Rag in this regard). Assuming Hot Press uses the same coating it should perform similarly.
-
An affordable alternative to HPR that actually outperforms it under some circumstances, but looks very very similar is PremierArt Smooth Generations Alise Fine Art. The other papers mentioned so far underperform HPR in my testing to some degree, both gamut volume and dmax, or don't represent a great savings over the HPR. The drawback is that the bright version's OBA content is not doing well in Aardenberg tests. This may not matter to many users, and it's only the paper base white that would be effected over time. There is an unbrightened version that would hold up better in that regard, but will not be quite as bright as HPR.
PremierArt Smooth Generations Alise Fine Art is an under-appreciated economical paper in my opinion. The other issue that must be mentioned is that many do not really detect any quality difference in papers that technically perform less well than others, given equally good profiles etc, so these decisions tend to be both objective and subjective.
Tyler
-
The drawback is that the bright version's OBA content is not doing well in Aardenberg tests. This may not matter to many users, and it's only the paper base white that would be effected over time.
Tyler
The FBAs are in the paper coating only and not throughout. And more dependent on FBA for its brightness. In that sense very different to Photorag. That it doesn't hold its brightness at Aardenburg doesn't surprise me.
Several messages in this thread with the image qualities of the papers reported: inksets could make a difference for a particular paper. Adding the printer or inkset to an observation of image quality, Dmax etc gives it more value I think.
met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst Dinkla
New: Spectral plots of +220 inkjet papers:
http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
-
Tyler,
For the record, the Hahnemuhle Fine Art Photo Rag 308 in my tests has an average brightness reading of L=96.25, while the Epson Hot Press Natural reads 97.35 (higher is brighter). Visually, however, the Hahnemuhle looks a little brighter than the Hot Press Natural under a 5000k Fluorescent bulb. What this tells me is that there is a possibility that the Hahnemuhle paper may have a small amount of brighteners (notice how carefully I've couched those terms). Maybe Ernst can confirm that. To my spectrometer, the Hot Press Natural is brighter. Also, for the record, all that information is in the published results on my website as linked above, including the all-important spread from useable dMax to paper white (it's all relative). Also, for the record, I'm using an Epson 3800 with the K3 inkset for my tests, but in the case of paper brightness comparisons, no ink is involved.
Aloha,
Aaron
-
Tyler,
For the record, the Hahnemuhle Fine Art Photo Rag 308 in my tests has an average brightness reading of L=96.25, while the Epson Hot Press Natural reads 97.35 (higher is brighter). Visually, however, the Hahnemuhle looks a little brighter than the Hot Press Natural under a 5000k Fluorescent bulb. What this tells me is that there is a possibility that the Hahnemuhle paper may have a small amount of brighteners (notice how carefully I've couched those terms). Maybe Ernst can confirm that. To my spectrometer, the Hot Press Natural is brighter. Also, for the record, all that information is in the published results on my website as linked above, including the all-important spread from useable dMax to paper white (it's all relative). Also, for the record, I'm using an Epson 3800 with the K3 inkset for my tests, but in the case of paper brightness comparisons, no ink is involved.
Aloha,
Aaron
HM PR has FBA throughout the paper in a modest amount, the Hot Press Natural not (slight dip even on the blues).
You use "brighter" while the L value actually describes an average of total white reflection, brightness is measured at 457 NM. The PhotoRag will be brighter than the HPN but isn't whiter than HPN (L 96.6-97.2 here). It shows in the spectral plots.
met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst Dinkla
New: Spectral plots of +220 inkjet papers:
http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
-
I'm not sure if these comments are to take issue with mine or not, but I'll clarify-
Neither those I print for regularly who prefer PhotoRag, nor myself, would consider any of the "natural" papers a viable visual alternative to PhotoRag. They consistently select it because it is NOT warm by comparison, amongst other reasons. Had I thought natural papers were what the OP would prefer, I would have emphasized the natural version of Alise more. I am fully aware that the brighteners in Alise are in the coating. Nonetheless, subjectively it is a viable option to PhotoRag, much more affordable, given of course the knowledge of potential brightness fade over time, which I was quick to point out. Prints with ink on paper laying next to each other are very visually similar, compared to pairings with natural papers.
I never mentioned any Epson papers, and though Hot Press Natural is an impressive performer, again, it is natural, and these new Epson papers don't don't represent a real significant savings, at least from my dealer, so seem OT to me. If they were, again I'd suggest the bright version for more of a subjective match to HPR for actual ink on paper prints, despite the base measurements differences.
The best alternative, both objectively and subjectively, to HPR that in my experience is Canson Rag Photographique, but it represents no savings, so OT.
Tyler
-
What this tells me is that there is a possibility that the Hahnemuhle paper may have a small amount of brighteners (notice how carefully I've couched those terms). Maybe Ernst can confirm that.
As Ernst said, HPR does have a modest amount of brighteners. They seem to have found the sweet spot though. HPR tends to look whiter than most natural/OBA-free papers, yet without looking "cool". The paper white is pretty close to neutral. And whatever formulation they're using doesn't hurt permanence, since HPR doesn't suffer the burnout or yellowing that many OBA-heavy papers do.
I think that's why it's so difficult to find a substitute for HPR. Even if you do find another cheaper paper with similar white point and texture/feel that is also in the ballpark for gamut/DMax, chances are it won't have the permanence of HPR. While this may not be an issue for personal prints, IMHO it has to be a concern for prints sold to collectors. Maybe worrying about prints lasting 100+ years is overkill, but having prints yellow or otherwise deteriorate in just a few years would be pretty embarrassing, and isn't something I would want to risk just to save 20% on paper costs.
-
When I used the term "brighter" it was in the subjective sense. Ernst is right, I should have used the term "lighter" or having higher "luminance," as that is what is being reported by the
"L" in the LAB numbers. I was not comparing "whiteness."
Although it was an error in the strictest sense, it is a very common one, made sometimes for practical communication with people who are more influenced by common usage and ordinary, rather than photographic, dictionaries (I have a box of laser paper here that is labeled "96 brightness"). A lot of people relate "luminance" only to something that emits light, rather than reflects it. However, "luminance" supplanted "brightness" in modern terminology for quantifying reflected light as well. In the discussion of the charts on my website, I was more careful about it. By way of clarification, the only LAB numbers being reported are the ones describing the paper base, the rest are expressed as reflection densities. Also, the "b-w" numbers do compare the densities of dMax vs. paper reflection density, rather than dMin in the strictest sense for the sake of uniformity, and for comparitive purposes only. In reality, the spread reported may or may not be achieved, depending on a number of factors such as profile accuracy, lighting, covering glass or plexiglas, etc.
Meanwhile, I was curious about the bright versions of the Epson HP and CP papers. They definitely have brightening agents, but I scaped away at the surfaces and found that the appearance of "white" did not differ all the way through the sheets. I didn't measure it to confirm, but it was pretty obvious that there was no difference. Ernst, perhaps you could shed some light on that (sorry, I can't help the pun). If the brightening agent is distributed throughout the paper thickness, should that make it more or less likely to fade?
Aloha,
Aaron
-
If the brightening agent is distributed throughout the paper thickness, should that make it more or less likely to fade?
Aloha,
Aaron
There are more factors having an influence on the shift of paper white in time. In the end Aardenburg will have the verdict on how the paper behaves. Mark gave a good summary on the Digital B&W list of the factors that have an influence. I assume he wouldn't mind a quote here:
> I believe there are several factors that influence OBA burnout and
> media white point stability. Here are some of the key variables.
>
> 1) concentration of OBAs, ie. how much does the initial media color
> depend on the incorporated OBAs. If very little, then total burnout
> produces only slight effect. If a lot, then total burnout produces
> large effect.
>
> 2). Location of OBAs. When located in top microporous coatings, the
> OBAs are extremely sensitive to oxidation (just like other dyes). The
> oxidation can be photochemically induced, but even more so due to
> ozone induced oxidation. The OBA's are more protected when located in
> subbing layers and paper core. Many RC papers, for example, have
> subbing layers below the top ink receptor layer and above the PE/TiO2
> layer where the manufacturer can include some OBAs.
>
> 3). Molecular structure of the OBA and interaction with the layer(s)
> in which they are embedded. For example, swellable polymers will
> indeed protect them more from oxidation, which in part explains why
> OBAs in traditional darkroom type photo papers have not gotten as bad
> a reputation (although some problems have been experienced in the
> field with traditional photo papers as well).
>
> 4) As a corrollary to item 3), the pore size of the micro/nano porous
> silcates used in the inkjet paper probably plays a role as it can
> also affect the oxygen penetration rates to the OBAs as well as the
> final physical shape of the OBA molecular chain structure due to
> electronic charge influences from the silicates distorting the bonds
> in the dye molecule.
>
> 5) Inclusion of additional tinting pigments in the paper
> size/coatings to achieve cooler media white point thus lessening the
> need for higher OBA concentrations. Typically you will see lower L*
> values for papers that add some cool-white hue with tinting
> additives, and UV-cut spectral data should still show blue wavelength
> region effects due to the added colorant.
>
> There's undoubtedly other variables as well, but these are some key
> variables that affect OBA fading impact on media white point
> stability.
> The manufacturers can also add anti-oxidants.
end of quote
If you check the Aardenburg paper white shifts of papers and my plots you will see some correlation between the paper construction (FBA placing) and white paper shifts but there isn't a strict 1:1 rule.
I prefer to use shift instead of fading. it is quite usual that the overall white reflectance actually (initially) increases a bit in the Aardenburg test but the brightness goes down in time due to FBA breakdown. I guess that first effect is like bleaching linen on the meadow. Due to the FBA loss a shift to a warmer paper happens.
On the brightness versus white reflectance. In the graphic industry the brightness number was used as a general indication of whiteness for papers that had very similar spectral plots. By measuring only the 457 NM reflectance is was an easy and fast method. We see however that it isn't an accurate description for the papers we use. And I think that simple rule may have had an influence on the use of FBAs to give that paper a boost to get in a higher category. Not a problem for magazine paper though.
met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst Dinkla
New: Spectral plots of +230 inkjet papers:
http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
-
To follow up on the last two posts, I printed out a bunch of B&W targets on Hahnemuhle Photo Rag Ultra Smooth for Mark to put into stability testing at Aardenburg. They were done on an Epson 3880 and one of the things we are also going to look at is various effects of the "toning wheel" from the standard Epson presets (sepia, warm, cold) to the extremes around the wheel's edges. It should be interesting to see the results.
-
Hi everyone
Just joined, first post.
I too love Hahnemuhle paper but the cost can be daunting. I'm keen to experiment with the other papers suggested here but the warning on the paper feed of my Epson 3880 says no Ultra smooth or Velvet Fine Art paper, which may explain why she was struggling sometimes with the 300g/m2 paper?
Any advice greatly appreciated, thanks a lot.
Shane
shanedaly.info
-
which paper feed are you referring to? the 38xx has 3
-
Hi Howard
The basic rear manual feed. The thick paper seemed to cause problems and I had to feed it one at a time, but the difference in image quality means I am keen to continue printing on this type of paper.
I just don't want to damage my printer..
Shane
-
Shane,
The SHEET feed (or standard feed) is where the 3800/3880 says no Ultra Smooth Fine Art, Velvet Fine Art and/or Water Color Radiant White. By this, they mean that you have to use the REAR feed for heavy paper and the FRONT feed for media that is between 1.2 and 1.5mm (48 to 60 mils). So, yes, you certainly can run Ultra Smooth and Velvet in a 3800/3880 with no problem. It's all in the manual. :)
-
Randy
Smashing, thanks for the info.
Read the manual?!! Now there's an idea.. ;)
Thanks again.
Shane