Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Not Harman Gloss; Harman Fragile  (Read 7070 times)

Sven W

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 514
Not Harman Gloss; Harman Fragile
« on: November 29, 2007, 10:53:26 am »

Printed a lot of Harman Gloss today with our brand new Epson 11880. And the results really blow you away!
But......
This beautiful paper is so FRAGILE!!
I get scratches on the surface just looking at it!
Most visible in dark/very dark areas.
I use cotton gloves, but just to lift a 80x100 cm print from the printer and put it on my working-table, you always touch something.

One customer (with a big smile on his face when looking) inspected a proof and happened to put one of the corners on another print, just slightly, and it was totally ruined!
It's ok when it's an A4, I just re-print it, but 1 sq.meter is expensive to re-print!

I have printed Hahnemuhle and Ultrasmooth for years, and have learned how to gently handle
these papers. Gloves and well-cut fingernails  
But this is First Price for bad handling.
What to do?
I've mailed to Harman in UK for advice.
Anybody with the same problems?
/Sven
Logged
Stockholm, Sweden

fike

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1413
  • Hiker Photographer
    • trailpixie.net
Not Harman Gloss; Harman Fragile
« Reply #1 on: November 29, 2007, 01:51:23 pm »

I agree that it is very fragile.  I get better sharpness from this paper than any other I have used, but just sliding another print across it will leave light scratches.  I would consider spraying it with a protectant, but I think that would damage the attractive finish.

perhaps some of these other Baryta new papers coming out will fix that problem. Hahnemuhle seems to have a new one that might be better.
« Last Edit: November 29, 2007, 02:00:05 pm by fike »
Logged
Fike, Trailpixie, or Marc Shaffer

John R Smith

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1357
  • Still crazy, after all these years
Not Harman Gloss; Harman Fragile
« Reply #2 on: November 30, 2007, 03:39:19 am »

Sven

I agree that this problem of surface marking seems to be a real issue with the Harman gloss. The biggest I print is A3, but I would imagine that handling very large prints would be quite nerve-wracking. For what it is worth, the surface does seem to harden up somewhat after two or three days, so I tend to put my prints up on the wall for a while before they get mounted or sleeved.

Presumably, this is in reality an Epson K3 ink problem rather than a paper issue - the pigment inks sit on the surface of the paper, and the dark areas (the PK ink) mark extremely easily. Does this also apply to HP or Canon inks, I wonder?

On the other hand, the paper looks so good that I am prepared spend the time handling it with great care.

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

Harris

  • Guest
Not Harman Gloss; Harman Fragile
« Reply #3 on: December 06, 2007, 10:53:59 pm »

[Presumably, this is in reality an Epson K3 ink problem rather than a paper issue - the pigment inks sit on the surface of the paper, and the dark areas (the PK ink) mark extremely easily. Does this also apply to HP or Canon inks, I wonder?]

It applies to HP Z3100 as well.  I did a job for a wedding photographer with the Harman, and it came out terrific.  Fantastic blacks - gave them to her the next day and she loved them - and then two days after that said they were scratched and could not use them.  That was without the gloss enhancer.  So I did some test prints with the GE, let them dry for 24 hours, and had the same result.  

Anyone have a answer to this problem?   What is the sense of having a great paper if it be used without damaging it.

Harris
Logged

Josh-H

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2079
    • Wild Nature Photo Travel
Not Harman Gloss; Harman Fragile
« Reply #4 on: December 06, 2007, 10:59:16 pm »

Quote
[Presumably, this is in reality an Epson K3 ink problem rather than a paper issue - the pigment inks sit on the surface of the paper, and the dark areas (the PK ink) mark extremely easily. Does this also apply to HP or Canon inks, I wonder?]

It applies to HP Z3100 as well.  I did a job for a wedding photographer with the Harman, and it came out terrific.  Fantastic blacks - gave them to her the next day and she loved them - and then two days after that said they were scratched and could not use them.  That was without the gloss enhancer.  So I did some test prints with the GE, let them dry for 24 hours, and had the same result. 

Anyone have a answer to this problem?   What is the sense of having a great paper if it be used without damaging it.

Harris
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=158840\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

the problem of fragility is the paper - not the inks. Same applies to the Canon Lucia pigment inks in my experience in terms of fragility on this paper.

I went to brush off a A4 print a week after drying on Harman Gloss FB AL using a very soft artists brush and it has destroyed the print - left permanent light but visible scar marks.

I love this paper's blacks - but its soo very very delicate.

I have since been sleeving my prints after drying in mylar to protect them - which is working well.
« Last Edit: December 06, 2007, 11:00:00 pm by Josh-H »
Logged
Wild Nature Photo Travel

John R Smith

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1357
  • Still crazy, after all these years
Not Harman Gloss; Harman Fragile
« Reply #5 on: December 07, 2007, 03:25:18 am »

I will try to find time to do a bit more comparitive testing over the weekend, making prints of solid black areas on various papers. The problem is to find some sort of consistent and repeatable scratching device which exerts a constant downward force on the paper surface! I will also ask the folks at Harman for their comments and report back.

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

AaronPhotog

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 128
    • Dygart Photography
Not Harman Gloss; Harman Fragile
« Reply #6 on: December 07, 2007, 04:23:39 am »

Perhaps it's our warmer and possibly more humid climate than some of you might have, but I've had no such problems with the Harman FB Gloss AL here in Hawaii.  My printer is an Epson 3800.  The prints sit overnight, and they seem to harden up just fine whether black and white or color.  I don't spray them, or take any extra precautions in handling.  I could scratch the surface with something like the edge of a screwdriver, but not by brushing it (I just tried that with a horsehair draftsman's brush - no marks whatsoever are visible even under strong magnification in reflections from a very close lightbulb - sorry).

Bad early batches??

I have more of a larger size on order.  If I have any problems with it, I'll let you know.

Meanwhile, as mentioned, the blacks are superb, the colors cover the whole range from delicate to "blitzkrieg," and the smoothness and detail are the best I've found so far.  The black ink curve starts as a smooth, straight diagonal line until it gradually levels off to its very impressive 2.46 dMax, and it exhibits no end-of-curve reversal or odd bumps or dips anywhere.  So far, so good.  

Aloha,
Aaron
Logged
Aaron Dygart,
Honolulu

rsk72000

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13
Not Harman Gloss; Harman Fragile
« Reply #7 on: December 07, 2007, 02:08:07 pm »

I too have found the paper to be quite fragile but the prints are great. I'm printing on the Canon ipf5100.

In my experience it does get somewhat less scratchable with time to dry but it is still easily scratched. I now make sure I have my matte and frame ready before I print so as soon as the image has had adequate drying time I can get it matted and framed ASAP.
Logged

Harris

  • Guest
Not Harman Gloss; Harman Fragile
« Reply #8 on: December 07, 2007, 10:29:12 pm »

Has anyone tried a spray or any other type of protective cover for the Harmon.  I recall someone in this forum said he was going to contact Harmon.  Any results yet.  

I certainly do not want to have a matte and frame ready for every print I make but it seems as if this is what will be required.  

Josh, what happens to them when they are taken out of the mylar sleeves?

Thanks,
Harris
Logged

BruceHouston

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 308
Not Harman Gloss; Harman Fragile
« Reply #9 on: December 07, 2007, 10:45:47 pm »

I too print on this paper and would appreciate knowing if anyone has tried a protective spray like Premier Art PrintShield.
Logged

Colorwave

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1006
    • Colorwave Imaging
Not Harman Gloss; Harman Fragile
« Reply #10 on: December 08, 2007, 01:30:20 am »

Quote
Has anyone tried a spray or any other type of protective cover for the Harmon.  I recall someone in this forum said he was going to contact Harmon.  Any results yet.[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=159175\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I don't think I'm the one who mentioned it, but I sent a PM to the Harman rep who occasionally visits here and asked what sprays they recommend.  Unfortunately, I never got an answer.  

I've tried the Premier spray and found it to screw up the finish.  It is compatible, but will never match the smooth texture of the original surface out of a spray can.  I haven't tried spraying it or another photo lacquer through a HVLP spray gun on the Harman, but based on my past lacquer experience, I would think you would need many coats of extremely thinned lacquer to avoid an orange peel texture.  They'd need to be some pretty special prints to justify that much time and energy.  Textured papers, or matte papers that work with a couple of light spray coats are an entirely animal than the super smooth Harman Gloss.

-Ron H.
Logged
-Ron H.
[url=http://colorwaveimaging.com

joeholmes

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6
Not Harman Gloss; Harman Fragile
« Reply #11 on: December 08, 2007, 10:53:32 am »

It's very possible that what you're seeing is light scratches from the print head.

When I printed some Crane Museo Silver Rag through the 3800's sheet feeder, I saw light scratches on the black areas of the print. Raising the print head and widening the platen gap (in the print dialog), cured the problem.

I also saw fewer problems when I used the rear manual feed -- from that feed, I could use a narrower platen gap.
Logged

Sven W

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 514
Not Harman Gloss; Harman Fragile
« Reply #12 on: December 08, 2007, 11:28:36 am »

Quote
Has anyone tried a spray or any other type of protective cover for the Harmon.  I recall someone in this forum said he was going to contact Harmon.  Any results yet. 


No reply from Harman so far......Maybe this is a sensitive issue?
Next week I'm going to print a very dark 44"x60", and I'm already nervous.

And I had scratches from the printhead once, but I just open up the PlatenGap one step
and it was gone. That was from a 13x19 sheet, no such problems with rolls. They curls less.
/Sven
Logged
Stockholm, Sweden

neoprinter

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 21
Not Harman Gloss; Harman Fragile
« Reply #13 on: December 13, 2007, 08:45:23 pm »

I'm not having any scratching problems printing on Harman gloss with an Epson 1400, but it does take a lot of ink to get any life out of it, making it expensive paper to use.  Innova Ultrasmooth gloss prints much better, but its surface isn't quite as nice as the Harman.

I tried various papers with an Epson 9800 using the photo black ink, and eventually gave up on printing color photography with pigment inks, using Colorburst X-Proof RIP.  Black and white fared pretty well on Innova Fibaprint semi-matte using the Epson Advanced B&W, except in very light areas where there wasn't enough ink and thus gloss optimiser, which resulted in dull spots.  Color looked pretty bad with the dull spots and dichroic bronzing in light blue or cyan areas.  

Then I saw Henry Wilhelm's 98 year rating for the Epson Claria dye ink.  That's better than any pigment ink on most papers!  My prints look like real photographic prints now.  I'm surprised more people haven't picked up on this, as dye ink prints photographs way better than pigment ink, and with just 6 colors.  I'm hoping Epson will market a larger printer for the Claria ink, as 13X19 is marginal for 35 mm originals.  I emailed Epson about this, but have received no response yet.  

I'm going to try out the two new papers as soon as they are available (Hahnemühle Fine Art Barayta and Epson Exhibition Fiber) before deciding which of the four fiber-base-type papers to use for exhibition prints.
Logged

joeholmes

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6
Not Harman Gloss; Harman Fragile
« Reply #14 on: December 13, 2007, 08:51:22 pm »

I printed a sample pack of the Epson Exhibition paper and it was really really nice. (And seems to be priced really really high.)

Quote
I'm going to try out the two new papers as soon as they are available (Hahnemühle Fine Art Barayta and Epson Exhibition Fiber) before deciding which of the four fiber-base-type papers to use for exhibition prints.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=160533\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged

rdonson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3263
Not Harman Gloss; Harman Fragile
« Reply #15 on: December 13, 2007, 09:18:08 pm »

Quote
Then I saw Henry Wilhelm's 98 year rating for the Epson Claria dye ink.  That's better than any pigment ink on most papers! 
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

You might want to read more on Wilhelm's site.  [a href=\"http://www.wilhelm-research.com/hp/Z3100.html]Click here[/url] to see a pigment ink that exceeds that rating.
Logged
Regards,
Ron

Ernst Dinkla

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4005
Not Harman Gloss; Harman Fragile
« Reply #16 on: December 14, 2007, 05:06:24 am »

Quote
Then I saw Henry Wilhelm's 98 year rating for the Epson Claria dye ink.  That's better than any pigment ink on most papers!  My prints look like real photographic prints now.  I'm surprised more people haven't picked up on this, as dye ink prints photographs way better than pigment ink, and with just 6 colors.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Rumor has it that even Epson was surprised about that outcome. Reading Epson's specs however it has to be seen where that ink belongs, dyes and pigments used in inkjet inks are very related and there's a gradual shift of Epson's pigment inks towards more dye like since the Archival pigment ink was introduced. Sometimes particle or pigment slips in the Epson vocabulary of the Claria documents so it will be somewhere halfway. This was discussed on the Digital B&W list a year ago.

So one should compare picture quality on the print and not on theoretical dye/pigment specs. The Dmax of black wasn't better either than some matte pigment inks on matte paper. Black dye ink used to outperform any pigment black on matte papers.

There are pigment inks with better light resistance.

Of the 3 papers tested the two top ones are RC coated and may proof to be ozone resistant too. It has to be seen whether the non RC papers behave as well. There are however no ozone numbers published. That's in general for all Epson inks these days, some up to two years "still in test" so one may question what "still in test" means. Some people think it means that the test method includes approval by the marketing department of Wilhelm's customer. What is worse is that the bare bulb test also is "still in test", usually that result is lower in years than the test with glass in between. I think that test should be finished earlier than the behind glass test. There are reports that one of the Claria hues isn't as UV proof as the "official" Epson pigment inks.

So if you stay with RC papers, frame behind glass or archive in books it should be save.

Another ink that should be tested by Image Engineering for some balance in results.


Ernst Dinkla

try: [a href=\"http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/]http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/[/url]
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up