Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Harman Gloss  (Read 5007 times)

Avalan

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 77
Harman Gloss
« on: October 11, 2007, 08:33:05 pm »

Yesterday I got the Harman paper and today had a chance to test the Harmsn Gloss : For the manufacturing quality, and also the print result using 5000 and HP Z-3100. These are the findings :

Manufacturing :
I got 3 packages : 8.5X11 sample pack for Harman Matte,  8.5X11 sample pack for Harman gloss and a box of 13X19 Harman gloss.
The matte sample pack was fine. In the glossy sample pack I found one of the sheets has a bump on the coating from manufacturing, which makes it useless. In a package of 5, one out of 5 found damaged, which is 20%.  unacceptable.
In the 13X19 box of 15 Glossy sheets, all of the sheets were damaged on the middle of the edge on one length. The damage was a strong 1/2 inch bending mark, for the whole stock.  It had nothing to do with the vendor which is Booksmart. Their package was a big box filled with bubble wraps and received with no damage. Even the original box of the 13X19 Harman - which was wrapped with original tight plastic wrap - has no sign of damage. So there is no way anyone can find out the paper inside the box is damaged, unless after opening the box. For me it is pretty clear that this was a manufacturing problem.  The paper was not handled well, before or during packing in the factory.  Since I can use them anyways by trimming the damaged edge, not a big deal and if it is just a random problem or not, I don't know.  But made me suspicious of the Harman's manufacturing procedures. You don't expect to see this kind of imperfection for a highly priced paper. Don't know is it a bad luck or what.  I like to hear what did you find in your package.

Z-3100.
I loaded an 13X19 glossy in the printer for printer calibration. (This is the first step before making a custom profile  thru the printer). First I chose the "Photo Gloss Paper" for media type and proceed.  There is visible roller marks on the paper. These marks are not the pizza wheel marks, which seems to be a general problem on some glossy papers in 3100. The marks are the roller marks which are grabbing the paper, before the pizza wheels.  So I changed the media type to " Heavy weight Coated Paper" and did the printer calibration one more time, hoping there might be less pressure on the paper.  It did not help.  I got the same roller pressure marks again. Then decided not to proceed for making  a profile with this paper, unless finding a way to avoid this unacceptable roller marks. For now I can not use the Harman gloss with 3100.

IPF5000.
I printed the "Outback Print's" test file, using Bookssmart's profile, Photo paper plus-semigloss setting,  perceptual, highest. The result is good, although can't give it as much credit as I have read about it  so far. Gloss differential is minor, but still There .

Verdict ;
So this is my conclusion at the moment:  Will pass the Harman gloss and wait to try the Baryta Hahnemuhle and the new Epson whenever they are available. For the following reasons: Poor manufacturing , being overly priced, gloss differential.

Don't know that the unreleased Baryta Hahnemuhle or Epson are any better compare to the glossy Harman or not.  Will wait and try them whenever they are available.

Regards - Avalan
Logged

dkeyes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 260
    • http://
Harman Gloss
« Reply #1 on: October 12, 2007, 02:09:01 am »

Have you actually printed an image with the gloss on the z3100? If you haven't try printing one to see if the marks are really there. When making profiles that use the gloss ink there are always  roller marks. The marks happen when the print gets drawn back through the rollers (to be read by eye1) causing the marks on the fresh gloss ink. Doesn't affect the profile. Look at the printed profile page before it is sucked back in to be read and see if there are marks.
- Doug
Logged

Brian Gilkes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 443
    • http://www.briangilkes.com.au
Harman Gloss
« Reply #2 on: October 12, 2007, 07:22:51 am »

That's disappointing. I would have expected the old Ilford plant would have coating down to a tee. Maybe it's a start up glitch. I'll have my own samples soon and will report. The Baryta bae and the alumina coating would seem to be a formidable approach. Let's see if they can stick it on right.
Cheers,
Brian
www.pharoseditions.com.au
Logged

John R Smith

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1357
  • Still crazy, after all these years
Harman Gloss
« Reply #3 on: October 12, 2007, 08:27:25 am »

Hmm.

Using the new Harman Gloss FB, I have so far consumed 5 trial packs and part of an A3 pack. There have been no QC issues with paper surface or condition as yet.

John
Logged
Hasselblad 500 C/M, SWC and CFV-39 DB
an

Fred Ragland

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 155
    • http://
Harman Gloss
« Reply #4 on: October 12, 2007, 09:44:30 am »

Quote
Hmm.

Using the new Harman Gloss FB, I have so far consumed 5 trial packs and part of an A3 pack. There have been no QC issues with paper surface or condition as yet.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=145499\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
What printer and what settings are you using?
Logged

John R Smith

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1357
  • Still crazy, after all these years
Harman Gloss
« Reply #5 on: October 12, 2007, 11:07:52 am »

Fred

printer is an Epson R2400, paper type set to Premium Glossy in the Advanced B/W Mode, standard K3 inkset. Results are great.

John
Logged
Hasselblad 500 C/M, SWC and CFV-39 DB
an

Avalan

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 77
Harman Gloss
« Reply #6 on: October 12, 2007, 01:33:58 pm »

Have you actually printed an image with the gloss on the z3100? If you haven't try printing one to see if the marks are really there. When making profiles that use the gloss ink there are always roller marks. The marks happen when the print gets drawn back through the rollers (to be read by eye1) causing the marks on the fresh gloss ink. Doesn't affect the profile. Look at the printed profile page before it is sucked back in to be read and see if there are marks.
- Doug

Hello Doug.
I just printed the profile chart, and will wait for couple of hours to  give it some extra time for drying  before scanning the chart and then will make some prints. The roller marks are still there, although not as strong as the calibration chart which was done yesterday. You are correct about what you have mentioned. When Glossy paper moves several times between the rollers, will get deeper roller marks.

The existing roller marks on the profile chart I just did, are minor. I expect to have the same on a real print as well. This a bit annoying. This afternoon after creating the profile, will make some prints to see how the roller marks look and if they are less noticable on the print . Will find out soon and will report when it is done.

Regards - Avalan
Logged

dcra4

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7
Harman Gloss
« Reply #7 on: October 12, 2007, 04:49:36 pm »

Verdict...will recommend and continue to use.

I ordered several packages and received some of their early production i believe. The blemishes I observed on the 8.5X11 and 13X19 sheets seemed excessive. I contacted Harman and then sent several samples to them for their evaluation. Below, you’ll find a copy of their response. My hat is off to them for excellent customer service! They did not deny the issue and are taking steps to see that the condition is remedied. I will definitely purchase more of their paper in the future.


“We have now fully evaluated your samples, and I have closed your complaint on my database - with the below pasted investigation finding comments.
You'll see it is my proposal that I send you over some replacement paper for your 2 sheet formats (which I am seriously envisaging will have lower numbers of these blemishes) - but I need an address, if you are in agreement, for where you woud like these sending.
Again, I offer our apologies for your inconvience. Please also feel free to come back to me with any further questions re the below summary.
Kind regards
sue
ps - it was an interesting/nice reflection tree image.

Summary of investigation findings
The samples have now been examined - and we do acknowledge that the circled defects are attributable to coating. They are commonly described as "microcracks" and can occur with any porous type inkjet papers, including, as you have unfortunately experienced, ours.

The levels you have identified on your samples are at a much higher level than we have been typically seeing during our Quality Control testing processes, and also during the general development of the product. More normal levels range from 0 to 1-2 defects per sheet.
That is not to say we have never seen similar levels as on your sheets, but such higer levels are certainly only rare.

On this occasion, and for which I can only apologise, it seems as though some material with higher levels of this defect than would pass our release criteria - were missed at the quality control stage

Although we are still actively involved in improving the product in this respect, an inherent design property of this paper, with its "air dried" look, means that it does not have a completely smooth surface, but does show a slight texture. As a result, these blemishes when they then do arise, usually merge with this surface appearance (at least - when present at extreme low levels and in small sizes). We have also found that these microcracks tend to fill-in when inked, and are not actually noticeable or distracting when viewing prints.

Having said all of the above, I have passed on your complaint to our ongoing product quality improvement teams - so please be assured that we take your findings and comments very seriously. We also very much appreciate you taking the time to report this to us, and thus giving us the opportunity to correct the situation.

As to your concerns that the roll you have on order might be affected at these levels, I cannot 100% guarantee that it will be totally free - because as you'll also have seen from your samples, some sheets probably showed none of the 'defects'. But some as you sent had 2 circled, and unfortunately some had several circled.
What I would like to suggest is that we will send you some paper as a goodwill gesture (to cover the 2 sheet formats you purchased ) - and that based on my above comments, and your experience with these free of charge replacements, you can decide what you wish to do concerning your outstanding roll order.
My personal belief with regard to the roll and any future material you may purchase i- s that I would expect them to show lower levels than you have regretfully experienced on the material you currently have.
I have assigned a Justified verdict - justified against product design issues, and our sincere apologies for the inconvenience that this has evidently caused you.”
Logged

rdonson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3263
Harman Gloss
« Reply #8 on: October 12, 2007, 05:20:39 pm »

That's an excellent response from Harman.  Please keep us informed as to the quality of the next batch of paper.
Logged
Regards,
Ron

thompsonkirk

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 208
    • http://www.red-green-blue.com
Harman Gloss
« Reply #9 on: October 12, 2007, 05:31:35 pm »

It's indeed a thoughtful & efficient reply, much more considerate than the sort of form-letter stonewall that one sometimes meets.  

But I wonder what effect 'microcracks' have on print permanence?  Any potential, that is, for 'macrocracks'?

Kirk
Logged

rdonson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3263
Harman Gloss
« Reply #10 on: October 12, 2007, 05:38:53 pm »

Quote
It's indeed a thoughtful & efficient reply, much more considerate than the sort of form-letter stonewall that one sometimes meets. 

But I wonder what effect 'microcracks' have on print permanence?  Any potential, that is, for 'macrocracks'?

Kirk
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=145589\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

That's why its not wise to buy a two year supply when its first introduced.  
Logged
Regards,
Ron

dcra4

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7
Harman Gloss
« Reply #11 on: October 12, 2007, 05:45:22 pm »

I should have added that I've now received fresh paper from Calumet, and Climax here in Tennessee and ran some test last night. I do not see any issues on this paper. It is, for all intents and purposes, perfect.

Bartya papers are new so I suspect we'll have to wait for Wilhelm to get a read on longevity.
Logged

Avalan

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 77
Harman Gloss
« Reply #12 on: October 12, 2007, 07:29:50 pm »

dcra4
Thanks for sharing the experience and your opinion. Sound some paper stock has been rushed to the market without proper quality control in place. But it is good to see they are taking it seriously and looking after the issue.

Doug
This is the result of the print with 3100:  After letting the profile chart dry for several hours, made the profile. Now the roller marks are more visible.
Then made a print on a 13x19 sheet Harman Gloss. I used the glossy paper setting , since the profile was made for this media type this morning.  Got serious head strikes on 2 separate spots. There was no headstrikes yesterday for calibration or today for the profile chart. Guess The HW media type needs to be chosen to avoid possible headstrikes (or simply it is not my day !!).
Also the roller marks are still there. Not strong but annoying in my opinion.  We can not blame the paper for this. This is a flaw in the 3100 design.

So the choice for myself is using the 5000 if I decide to use this paper again. For people using just 3100, I don't know what can be done. Maybe some other settings can improve it or just ignore the roller marks.

I will do the same 3100 test with Baryta Hahnemuhle and Epson whenever they might be available to see if they are usable with 3100 without the roller marks. Although I doubt it.

Regards -Avalan
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up