3800/4800 & Matte Papers.

[dmccombs]

I recently got an Epson 3800, and have been getting generally good print results.  

On the glossy and luster papers, I simply use the profile provided by the paper maker, and select the paper they recommend.  This has worked very well.

When I do the same thing with Epson Enhanced Matte, Hahnemuhle Rag Mat, Hahnemuhle Rag Bright White, and Hahnemuhle Rag Pearl, the prints are a tad dark.  When I lower the ink level to -10% to 12%, the prints have the right brightness in the darks, but could use a slight saturation boost in the mids.

Are other people seeing the need to adjust ink levels when printing on Matte papers, or make any other tweeks?

Thanks,
Darrell

[Stephen Best]

When I do the same thing with Epson Enhanced Matte, Hahnemuhle Rag Mat, Hahnemuhle Rag Bright White, and Hahnemuhle Rag Pearl, the prints are a tad dark.  When I lower the ink level to -10% to 12%, the prints have the right brightness in the darks, but could use a slight saturation boost in the mids.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=96312\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I'm not exactly sure what Hahnemühle papers you're talking about, but the usual recommendation for their own profiles is a media setting of Velvet Fine Art, Perceptual intent and BPC off.

[dmccombs]

The exact paper names are:
    Photo Rag
    Photo Rag Bright White
    FineArt Pearl
    Epson Enhanced Matte

For the Hahnemuhle papers I used the intructions provided (like you lised for the rag papers above).

Should I take your answer to be "No", you don't adjust the ink levels on Matte papers, or "No", you haven't used these matte papers?

Regards,
Darrell
   

I'm not exactly sure what Hahnemühle papers you're talking about, but the usual recommendation for their own profiles is a media setting of Velvet Fine Art, Perceptual intent and BPC off.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=96316\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

[picnic]

The exact paper names are:
    Photo Rag
    Photo Rag Bright White
    FineArt Pearl
    Epson Enhanced Matte

For the Hahnemuhle papers I used the intructions provided (like you lised for the rag papers above).

Should I take your answer to be "No", you don't adjust the ink levels on Matte papers, or "No", you haven't used these matte papers?

Regards,
Darrell
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=96376\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Did you try softproofing?  That may be helpful to adjust those particular tones.

[dmccombs]

Yes, I did softproof.  I guess this leads to where I thought the thread may lead.  

Do others see they need to make an adjustment when printing on the matte papers?

If they do, are they handling this by reducing ink, or maybe applying a curve?

Did you try softproofing?  That may be helpful to adjust those particular tones.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=96382\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

[Jonathan Wienke]

If you tweak ink levels in the driver, yo've invalidated the profile, and need to reprofile with the new driver settings. The more ink you can lay down without pooling, the grater the level of saturation you can achieve. I'd leave the ink level where you started, and fix the density issue with a ciustom profile. You'll get the overall brightness of the print corrected without losing the wider gamut you're getting from the default ink level.

[dmccombs]

That makes sense Jonathan.  The colors did seems a bit more vibrant when the ink was left at the default setting.  the dark areas just seemed a tad too dark.

It makes sense to just adjust the darks, and it makes sense to get profiles made for the papers I will use a lot.

I had just been reading how most people didn't feel thye need a custom profile made, so I figured I would post the question.

I only seem to have the issue on matte papers.  The Glossy, Semigloss, and Luster papers seem fine.

Thanks,
Darrell

If you tweak ink levels in the driver, yo've invalidated the profile, and need to reprofile with the new driver settings. The more ink you can lay down without pooling, the grater the level of saturation you can achieve. I'd leave the ink level where you started, and fix the density issue with a ciustom profile. You'll get the overall brightness of the print corrected without losing the wider gamut you're getting from the default ink level.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=96404\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

[picnic]

Yes, I did softproof.  I guess this leads to where I thought the thread may lead. 

Do others see they need to make an adjustment when printing on the matte papers?

If they do, are they handling this by reducing ink, or maybe applying a curve?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=96397\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Then--I should have been more informative about this.  Yes--I do adjust.  For instance, I just sampled a Hawks Mt. paper--I softproofed and added both a curve layer and a color balance layer.   When I softproof I duplicate the original file that I've processed, then on the second I add any adjustment layers for whatever paper.  I can name those layers for the paper, the adjustment and save the whole psd file (native size as I save my files since I often print at various sizes).  I can turn on or off any of these adj. layers as needed.

I should add--I'm still looking for 'the' paper to replace VFA in larger format (HPR may be it--but there's another in the mix or an addition, Innova F type semimatte).  Hawk's Mt now has several papers at 17" x 25" and this was one of them so worth trying.  

Diane

[Brian Gilkes]

A few general points:
a/IMHO Hahnemuhle and most other canned profiles are not that hot. As a % of Lab ,I can get 30% greater gamut on H Photo Rag with a custom profile than from Hahnemuhle's profile. Analysis of the 2 profiles reveals marked difference in printer linearities.This is despite Epson's claims to match printers in the factory. I would also expect linearity to change with time and printer use.
b/There is no relationship between what is seen on a monitor and what prints unless image is viewed through the profile with adjustment for paper white and black . As black on matte reflects more white light than gloss under unpolarised conditions, this may account for some of the variance you are experiencing.
c/Two more monitor viewing conditions need to be met. The monitor itself must be profiled  (not just calibrated)- which means it must be capable of being profiled, and the room illumination should be low.
d/ Viewing conditions for print should also be standardised. Matte prints may appear darker as they just reflect less light. Soft proofing may approximate print appearance in some theoretical standard illumination , but the print may look dark on display. In this case, you may need an adjustment layer  or to up light level when matte prints are viewed. If prints are to be framed behind glass, then this may not apply.
e/I would not use a colour balance layer as it can cause clipping. A basic approach is to use curves blended in luminosity and HSL blended on colour. Don't touch Lightness in HSL.
f/Hint-when making your custom profiles consider rendering Relative Colorimetric not Perceptual,
and check BPC.
g/Diane-There are lots of alternatives to Hahnemuhle papers . Crane Museo Max compares very well for instance. It depends largely what surface you prefer, but this is largely irrelevant behind glass. Some of the Hahnemuhle papers that are being optimised for the new HP Z printers could be worth watching.  Papers are not created equal. Coating, textures and base colour as well as brighteners cause great variation in D range and colour range. Some papers look fantastic but have relatively small colour gamuts.Some do not take certain colours well. Some profile well, have great D and colour range, but don't hold fine detail. There could be a book written on papers for digital printing. I'd actually think of doing it but it would be out of date by years end.
HTH
Cheers
Brian
www.pharoseditions.com.au

[dmccombs]

Brian,

  This is terrific info.  

a/ Do you have anyone you recommend to make good profiles?

b/ Does this mean I have to have the Simulate Paper Color,  and Simulate Black Ink settings "on" when softproofing?

c/ What is the difference between calibrated and profiled?  I calibrated mine using the Eye Display puck.  What else needs to be done on the monitor?

f/  You recommend "Relative Colorimetric not Perceptual, and check BPC".   I think Epson recommends this.  Do you recommend this some all the profiles are based upon the same settings?

   Do you have any commnets on Photo Rag vs. Photo Rag bright White?

Many Thanks,
Darrell

A few general points:
a/IMHO Hahnemuhle and most other canned profiles are not that hot. As a % of Lab ,I can get 30% greater gamut on H Photo Rag with a custom profile than from Hahnemuhle's profile. Analysis of the 2 profiles reveals marked difference in printer linearities.This is despite Epson's claims to match printers in the factory. I would also expect linearity to change with time and printer use.
b/There is no relationship between what is seen on a monitor and what prints unless image is viewed through the profile with adjustment for paper white and black . As black on matte reflects more white light than gloss under unpolarised conditions, this may account for some of the variance you are experiencing.
c/Two more monitor viewing conditions need to be met. The monitor itself must be profiled  (not just calibrated)- which means it must be capable of being profiled, and the room illumination should be low.
d/ Viewing conditions for print should also be standardised. Matte prints may appear darker as they just reflect less light. Soft proofing may approximate print appearance in some theoretical standard illumination , but the print may look dark on display. In this case, you may need an adjustment layer  or to up light level when matte prints are viewed. If prints are to be framed behind glass, then this may not apply.
e/I would not use a colour balance layer as it can cause clipping. A basic approach is to use curves blended in luminosity and HSL blended on colour. Don't touch Lightness in HSL.
f/Hint-when making your custom profiles consider rendering Relative Colorimetric not Perceptual,
and check BPC.
g/Diane-There are lots of alternatives to Hahnemuhle papers . Crane Museo Max compares very well for instance. It depends largely what surface you prefer, but this is largely irrelevant behind glass. Some of the Hahnemuhle papers that are being optimised for the new HP Z printers could be worth watching.  Papers are not created equal. Coating, textures and base colour as well as brighteners cause great variation in D range and colour range. Some papers look fantastic but have relatively small colour gamuts.Some do not take certain colours well. Some profile well, have great D and colour range, but don't hold fine detail. There could be a book written on papers for digital printing. I'd actually think of doing it but it would be out of date by years end.
HTH
Cheers
Brian
www.pharoseditions.com.au
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=96443\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

[Stephen Best]

The exact paper names are:
    Photo Rag
    Photo Rag Bright White
    FineArt Pearl
    Epson Enhanced Matte

For the Hahnemuhle papers I used the intructions provided (like you lised for the rag papers above).

Should I take your answer to be "No", you don't adjust the ink levels on Matte papers, or "No", you haven't used these matte papers?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=96376\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I use some Photo Rag 308, plus Enhanced Matte for occasional proofing (because it's cheap) ... the others are too white for me. I don't generally have a problem with the density but will tweak the shadow point as required on matte papers.

A few observations:

FineArt Pearl isn't a matte paper, it's a PK paper.

Hahnemühle are listing the same profile for the 3800 and 4800. This looks a lot like expediency.

All the papers you list have OBA's (Photo Rag 308 not so much) and as such are very dependent on viewing conditions. As Brian has noted above, you have to standardize on these conditions before you can make any assessment of how close a monitor match you're getting.

[dmccombs]

Stephen,

   FineArt Pearl is a matte, except for the surface.  ;-)  I know it is matte-like.  It seems like the more porous the surface, the more off my darks are.  That is why I first asked about ink reduction.  I see less of the issues I mentioned on the PEarl, then the true matte papers, but more than on the glossy and luster types.

I agree with you on the OBAs, but I have viewed these under near-5000 and 5000 degree lighting.  The darker parts of the images are too dark either way.

Regards,
Darrell

I use some Photo Rag 308, plus Enhanced Matte for occasional proofing. I don't generally have a problem with the density but will tweak the shadow point as required on matte papers.

A few observations:

FineArt Pearl isn't a matte paper, it's a PK paper.

Hahnemühle are listing the same profile for the 3800 and 4800. This looks a lot like expediency.

All the papers you list have OBA's (Photo Rag 308 not so much) and as such are very dependent on viewing conditions. As Brian has noted above, you have to standardize on these conditions before you can make any assessment of how close a monitor match you're getting.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=96460\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

[Stephen Best]

I agree with you on the OBAs, but I have viewed these under near-5000 and 5000 degree lighting.  The darker parts of the images are too dark either way.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=96466\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

It's not just the temperature, but also the illumination level. Anyway, it's hard to judge whether this is an issue with the printer/profiles or your expectancy. I do my own profiling, but from memory Hahnemühle's own profiles were close to what I got (starting with the same settings and using the same profiling software). I have a mate that just bought a 3800 and I'll see what his experiences are ... it looks like a great printer for the money. I will however make an observation that printing on matte papers is harder to get right but eventually more rewarding.

[dmccombs]

Stephen,

Thanks for the clarification on the Monitor calibration/profiling.

I calibrated my monitor using Eye Match, which also allows me to set the luminance.  The Eye Match had me turn down the lumance quite a bit, and now my prints from outside labs, and my glossy luster prints match the monitor very well.  I am comfortable that my monitor is reasonable well calibrated.

I am much less sure of the Percentual/Relative BP ON/OFF type settings though.  I apprciate everyone's help with that so far.  

Thanks,
Darrell

It's not just the temperature, but also the illumination level. Anyway, it's hard to judge whether this is an issue with the printer/profiles or your expectancy. I do my own profiling, but from memory Hahnemühle's own profiles were close to what I got (starting with the same settings and using the same profiling software). I have a mate that just bought a 3800 and I'll see what his experiences are ... it looks like a great printer for the money. I will however make an observation that printing on matte papers is harder to get right but eventually more rewarding.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=96474\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

[Brian Gilkes]

Brian,

  This is terrific info.

Thanks

a/ Do you have anyone you recommend to make good profiles?

Yes. First where are you?

b/ Does this mean I have to have the Simulate Paper Color,  and Simulate Black Ink settings "on" when softproofing?

Yes. Certainly with good custom profiles. With generic stuff it's a bit hard, without analysing the profile, to know what assumptions have gone into  it. There is a lowest common denominator approach with many, which puts you in the right stadium , but your precise position is problematic.
It really depends how important this is to you. I'd guess it is more important than Hahnemuhles punt. I can see their point of view though. They know the fusspots - like me,Stephen and probably you , will go to custom profiles.

c/ What is the difference between calibrated and profiled?  I calibrated mine using the Eye Display puck.  What else needs to be done on the monitor?

Profiling requires appropriate software to interpret spectrophotometric data and produce modifications to LUT tables in the computer to finely tune calibration. Calibration should aim to get you close. That is facilitated by the ability of the monitor to adjust RGB independantly with hardware. Lots of CRT monitors would do that, but they are now not being manufatured. Most LCD monitors do not have hardware calibration of RGB. That's why we must fork out big $ for top end Eizo, Quato or NEC monitors. Anything less, and that includes Eizo Flexscans , cannot be accurately profiled for image editing tasks. Many can't even reduce their brightness sufficiently.
There are more people playing games than fine printing. Sigh..

f/  You recommend "Relative Colorimetric not Perceptual, and check BPC".   I think Epson recommends this.  Do you recommend this some all the profiles are based upon the same settings?

I don't like generalising, but I would sat for most critical purposes, yes. If you ensure your color space is not clipping , then Rel. Col is more accurate. You may want to test on Perceptual too as the result may be more pleasing. Checking BPC maps Bk point to that of the paper, so maximum shadow detail is maintained. If this does not matter, you can pour on the ink and get a better black. I suspect some of the reported high DMaxs on matte papers (say above 1.6 with Epson K3 inks) may fall into this catagory.

   Do you have any commnets on Photo Rag vs. Photo Rag bright White?

PRBW has more optical brighteners. It will look brighter and more saturated if viewed uder light containing UV components .In  theory (I don't want to get sued) these prints may yellow under these conditions as the UV destroys the brighteners. There is not much advantage of PGBW or any other paper with high optical brightening agents when they are displayed under standard gallery or home tungsten lighting. They are great under fluoros at the office if you can convince the boss he/she should replace them (from you) every 12 months.

Many Thanks,
Darrell

Cheers,
Brian
www.pharoseditions.com.au

[dmccombs]

Brian,

   I am in Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA.

   Thanks so much for all the information.  It is really helpful.  I really want to get the best prints possible out of this printer.  The printer, paper, and inks all seem fine, now I just need to ensure the operator is up to speed.    

Thanks,
Darrell

a/ Do you have anyone you recommend to make good profiles?

Yes. First where are you?

[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=96484\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

[Stephen Best]

I am much less sure of the Percentual/Relative BP ON/OFF type settings though.  I apprciate everyone's help with that so far. 
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=96483\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Try this. Place an eyedropper (Color Sampler Tool) in the deep shadows and change the readout to Proof Color. Now select Proof Setup->Custom and select the profile for the paper you're using. Change the rendering intent and/or BPC setting and look at the Proof Color readout. Depending on the profile, you'll generally find that Perceptual with BPC OFF is closer to Relative Colorimetric with BPC ON. Perceptual with BPC ON can be way lighter ... sometimes the same, sometimes darker (you have to experiment with each profile). BPC compresses the tonality of the whole image, something that Perceptual rendering is already doing (and arguably more successfully). Try the permutations for yourself.

[picnic]

e/I would not use a colour balance layer as it can cause clipping. A basic approach is to use curves blended in luminosity and HSL blended on colour. Don't touch Lightness in HSL.

fand check BPC.
g/Diane-There are lots of alternatives to Hahnemuhle papers . Crane Museo Max compares very well for instance. It depends largely what surface you prefer, but this is largely irrelevant behind glass. Some of the Hahnemuhle papers that are being optimised for the new HP Z printers could be worth watching.  Papers are not created equal. Coating, textures and base colour as well as brighteners cause great variation in D range and colour range. Some papers look fantastic but have relatively small colour gamuts.Some do not take certain colours well. Some profile well, have great D and colour range, but don't hold fine detail. There could be a book written on papers for digital printing. I'd actually think of doing it but it would be out of date by years end.

. 

Thanks for the tip about the color balance layer.  Hadn't thought of that.  This is the first time I have ever added a color balance adj. layer, but I wasn't getting there with curves alone.

Yep, I know that---I have a stack of them sampled and printed and I've been looking at them under glass.  I have the CM Max sample coming also--someone else recommended it.  I was really leaning toward the Innova F semimatte, but under glass--its not worth the cost though I will buy 8.5 x 11 for a some boxed prints.  I am trying to settle on one or 2 papers  (beside the roll luster) to keep things consistent--and there are a lot of wonderful papers out there--I've been doing spec/price and real world sampling of a good many--and I'll just have to settle on something for 16 x 24 prints (roll works out better since I prefer 17 x 26 and can cut, but wonder how well the heavier papers will decurl).

Maybe you SHOULD write a book Brian--but the paper world is moving fast and changing--just name changes alone for some are confusing.

Diane