Raw & Post Processing, Printing > Printing: Printers, Papers and Inks
Back to Baryta
Jane:
Some time ago I ran an informal and very limited comparison of prints on reflective papers I happened to have on hand, the Harman by Hahnemuhle Gloss Baryta, the Epson Exhibition Fiber and the Ilford Gold Fibre Silk ( all using ImagePrint profiles, which I trust to do well by the papers. ). The Ilford does work very nicely with some black and white images but overall, the Harman came out on top and I've put up with the outrageous curling problems as packaged by Hahnemuhle ever since for the sake of the Harman's superior tonal reproduction ( have to say that there was some improvement on the curling front with the last box I bought ). I recently ( and hopefully ) bought some letter-size Canson Baryta Photographique. It arrived nice and flat in the box, but unfortunately also, to my eye, rendered tones rather flatly. I judge it much inferior to the Harmon, where you get the tonal range on the paper where you put it on the screen.
I do intend to try the new Epson Legacy papers, both the reflective and the matte. I think someone compared the Legacy baryta to the Canson. Has anyone had experience with that paper as well as H by H Gloss Baryta?
And switching to matte papers, my favorite has been the Epson UltraSmooth Fine Art ( as against some of the Hahmemuhle fine art papers ), but I will also try the new Legacy matte papers. I realize that much of this is old hat at this forum, but I hope not stale. Suggestions and opinions would be welcome.
Mark D Segal:
--- Quote from: Jane on April 27, 2016, 04:34:02 pm ---Some time ago I ran an informal and very limited comparison of prints on reflective papers I happened to have on hand, the Harman by Hahnemuhle Gloss Baryta, the Epson Exhibition Fiber and the Ilford Gold Fibre Silk ( all using ImagePrint profiles, which I trust to do well by the papers. ). The Ilford does work very nicely with some black and white images but overall, the Harman came out on top and I've put up with the outrageous curling problems as packaged by Hahnemuhle ever since for the sake of the Harman's superior tonal reproduction ( have to say that there was some improvement on the curling front with the last box I bought ). I recently ( and hopefully ) bought some letter-size Canson Baryta Photographique. It arrived nice and flat in the box, but unfortunately also, to my eye, rendered tones rather flatly. I judge it much inferior to the Harmon, where you get the tonal range on the paper where you put it on the screen.
I do intend to try the new Epson Legacy papers, both the reflective and the matte. I think someone compared the Legacy baryta to the Canson. Has anyone had experience with that paper as well as H by H Gloss Baryta?
And switching to matte papers, my favorite has been the Epson UltraSmooth Fine Art ( as against some of the Hahmemuhle fine art papers ), but I will also try the new Legacy matte papers. I realize that much of this is old hat at this forum, but I hope not stale. Suggestions and opinions would be welcome.
--- End quote ---
None of this makes any sense whatsoever to another reader without a thorough explanation of your testing and printing methodologies and equipment used, kind of test images and display thereof unless standard well-known printet test targets. Reading some paper reviews on this website or other serious ones elsewhere may help you along.
elliot_n:
--- Quote from: Mark D Segal on April 27, 2016, 05:41:06 pm ---None of this makes any sense whatsoever to another reader without a thorough explanation of your testing and printing methodologies and equipment used, kind of test images and display thereof unless standard well-known printet test targets. Reading some paper reviews on this website or other serious ones elsewhere may help you along.
--- End quote ---
Jane’s post made sense to me.
I share her opinion that the Harman paper has the best image quality of the baryta papers - it’s sharp, it’s smooth, and the ink seems to really sink into the surface. However the curling issue (sheets curl up, rolls curl down) is a major drawback (head strikes, print handling etc).
The Canson Baryta lies much flatter - but I prefer looking at images printed on the Harman.
Canson Platine is worth a look.
Mark D Segal:
OK, I suppose if you are just trading personal opinions about papers it's fine as far as it goes, which to my mind is not very, but each to his/her own. I'd be the last one to discourage simply trading undocumented opinions if that is the intent.
Discussions and even formal reviews of papers are admittedly difficult because given what it is, the most effective way to appreciate paper is from directly using it and handling it oneself. But one can't do that with thousands of readers over the internet. That is why a lot of well-structured surrounding information about comparison approach, materials, etc. should help to enhance readers' appreciation of what the writer experiences and is trying to convey.
Jane:
Thank you Elliot, and you, too, Mark, for your responses. I appreciate the value of technical testing, some reported here for different characteristics, and of course the permanency testing by the Wilhelm Institute, but I'm speaking of the artistic impression and tonal fidelity achieved by the paper ( given the certain printer, inkset, profiles, etc. ). I specified an informal and limited comparison, not a 'test'. It's the eye that judges the overall impact of an image and I was putting forward my eye's view. I was wondering what opinions other had about the Harman what they thought of the new Epson Legacy papers in comparison.
PS: will try the Canson Platine.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version