Z3100-Harman Glossy vs Hahnemuhle FAP

[neil snape]

No I said I can't say on the Z, I don't have one any longer to print with.
On the 9180 it works well though, in fact the first Baryta to be truly mark free both sides.
I posted the review on my site. I hope there are not too many omissions or errors.

http://www.neilsnape.com/HPR_Baryta_review.htm

[dandeliondigital]

Hi Neil,
Looks from the review like you've had the pleasure of really getting to know H Photo Rag Baryta. Too bad it doesn't appear to be HPZ friendly? I had wrongly thought that the HP 9180 was a dye ink printer, but a quick check on the HP site shows it to be "archivable." I may have to consider this one in the future to replace the aging Epson 2200.

Without creating too much "thread drift" how do you like the HP 9180 for your B&W prints?

Thanks, and so long for now, TOM

No I said I can't say on the Z, I don't have one any longer to print with.
On the 9180 it works well though, in fact the first Baryta to be truly mark free both sides.
I posted the review on my site. I hope there are not too many omissions or errors.

http://www.neilsnape.com/HPR_Baryta_review.htm
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=217379\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

[rdonson]

Sorry, but I didn't understand this: Hahnemuhle Photo Rag (HP HSFA). This not the HP Hahnemuhle paper is it?  What is  (HP HSFA)?

Do you know if there is anything I should use to clean the rollers? Maybe that would help with the subtle marks I get in heavy ink areas.

When I do the color calibration and make a profile, the printer leaves some pretty shocking marks on those prints and I guess it's because they get pulled back rather aggressively to be read. No one I've asked has ever stated if this matters or not.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=217364\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

HP HSFA = HP Hahnemuhle Smooth Fine Art  - its Hahnemuhle Photo Rag with a coating optimized for the HP Vivera pigment inks

I've not cleaned my rollers.  Perhaps clean with ordinary drug store alcohol?

For the calibration and profiles you might tell the printer that you'd like to read the chart later.  The last is an option with APS, not sure if its across the board.  You can also extend the drying time before the printer will read the chart.  

Hope this helps,

[William Morse]

Hi Ron-

How do you extend the drying time for profile reading?

Thanks, Bill

You can also extend the drying time before the printer will read the chart. 

Hope this helps,
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=217414\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

[rdonson]

Hi Bill,

One way is to use the printer console.

- bring up the menu
- select the setup icon (the open end wrench)
- select Print Retrieval
- select drying time
- select "extended" to set a longer than recommended time

Hope this helps,

[neil snape]

Hi Neil,
Looks from the review like you've had the pleasure of really getting to know H Photo Rag Baryta. Too bad it doesn't appear to be HPZ friendly? I had wrongly thought that the HP 9180 was a dye ink printer, but a quick check on the HP site shows it to be "archivable." I may have to consider this one in the future to replace the aging Epson 2200.

Without creating too much "thread drift" how do you like the HP 9180 for your B&W prints?

Thanks, and so long for now, TOM
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=217400\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

The 9180 is not as good on photo media as the Z or Epson or Canon.
On the 9180 however matte paper on B&W goes well beyond all other printers for image quality.
With the curves and profiles I put up on my site in the review (s) B&W output on Photo media is quite acceptable, but the Vivera inkset without Gloss Enhancer is prone to bronzing and a large degree of gloss differential that Epson K3, VM, and the newer Canon x100 inkset will not have.

Be aware the Photo Rag Baryta is NOT the same as Fine Art Baryta. I think it will work well in any printer , including of course the Z printers. It is a new paper that just came out. It is already available since the beginning of August.

[dandeliondigital]

Hi Neil,
Thanks for all the interesting info. Much appreciated heads up on the Photo Rag Baryta Paper. Sounds like I have to try that one for sure.

So long for now, TOM

The 9180 is not as good on photo media as the Z or Epson or Canon.
On the 9180 however matte paper on B&W goes well beyond all other printers for image quality.
With the curves and profiles I put up on my site in the review (s) B&W output on Photo media is quite acceptable, but the Vivera inkset without Gloss Enhancer is prone to bronzing and a large degree of gloss differential that Epson K3, VM, and the newer Canon x100 inkset will not have.

Be aware the Photo Rag Baryta is NOT the same as Fine Art Baryta. I think it will work well in any printer , including of course the Z printers. It is a new paper that just came out. It is already available since the beginning of August.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=217498\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

[dandeliondigital]

Hi ron,
Man I get so confused by all the names and abbreviations one must use to either preserve time or fit on the line so that you know what's up on the HP Z Screen. I wish they had made it wider and less deep. (Yet another or many design decisions, I tend to make into a wish list).

I actually did clean the rollers with some isopropyl alcohol, but they are still tearing up my latest experiments in fine art fiber photo paper.

I am actually using the HP Hahnemuhle Smooth Fine Art, and I like it but I need more choices.

I usually extend the drying time.

I've tried a number of times to print a profile chart using the both optimized for width and to be re-read, but it never worked right for me with the older firmware. It used to just spit it out, over and over. So now that I have different FW than then, I guess I should try that again.

So long for now, TOM

HP HSFA = HP Hahnemuhle Smooth Fine Art  - its Hahnemuhle Photo Rag with a coating optimized for the HP Vivera pigment inks

I've not cleaned my rollers.  Perhaps clean with ordinary drug store alcohol?

For the calibration and profiles you might tell the printer that you'd like to read the chart later.  The last is an option with APS, not sure if its across the board.  You can also extend the drying time before the printer will read the chart. 

Hope this helps,
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=217414\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

[kers]

Hello Tom,
I don't know if your question is already answered, but I just had my starwheel assembly and the rubber rollers replaced for nothing within my 1 year garantee.
The new rollers are brown and are replaced one by one ( poor technician)

I find it to be a big difference.
In the short time i used it it left no marks at all on Harman Gloss FB Al
Also the Epson exhibition Fire ( also called Epson Traditional Photo paper) came out perfect

the latter paper I like best for black and white.
 No bronzing- no gloss differential. + deep well defined blacks.
But it only comes in sheets.

for bigger prints I still will have to use the very good HP satin Pro

Pieter

[Colorwave]

Pieter-
Might I ask what standards HP is requiring before replacing your pressure rollers these days?  Did they have you send them a sample print?  Did it need to be on HP media?
Thanks,
Ron

[dandeliondigital]

hi kers,
My current situation is dire.

If I may ask, were you like me struggling to get prints on all these different papers that you felt the Z was designed for, being a PHOTO Printer with tremendous capabilities, and yet failing to get acceptable results due to roller marks?

I at one point spent an entire day last January (after I had my star wheel assembly replaced) preping samples of the various marks I was still having trouble with, and FYI, these were all on HP papers. I FedExed Tech Support in Bosie a large tube of prints all containing notes and pointing out my troubles, but I never received any response or reply from them. I put in quit a lot of time and effort and nothing. At that time, I had a lot of other fish to fry, so I went off the case. Meanwhile, I knew HP had to be working on it so I have been patient, but I need to get on with this.

If you could take a photo of your printer's star wheel and rollers, it might be helpful.

Thanks for your comments and interest, and so long for now, TOM

Hello Tom,
I don't know if your question is already answered, but I just had my starwheel assembly and the rubber rollers replaced for nothing within my 1 year garantee.
The new rollers are brown and are replaced one by one ( poor technician)

I find it to be a big difference.
In the short time i used it it left no marks at all on Harman Gloss FB Al
Also the Epson exhibition Fire ( also called Epson Traditional Photo paper) came out perfect

the latter paper I like best for black and white.
 No bronzing- no gloss differential. + deep well defined blacks.
But it only comes in sheets.

for bigger prints I still will have to use the very good HP satin Pro

Pieter
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=217700\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

[neil snape]

Hello Tom,
I don't know if your question is already answered, but I just had my starwheel assembly and the rubber rollers replaced for nothing within my 1 year garantee.
The new rollers are brown and are replaced one by one ( poor technician)

I find it to be a big difference.
In the short time i used it it left no marks at all on Harman Gloss FB Al
Also the Epson exhibition Fire ( also called Epson Traditional Photo paper) came out perfect

the latter paper I like best for black and white.
 No bronzing- no gloss differential. + deep well defined blacks.
But it only comes in sheets.

for bigger prints I still will have to use the very good HP satin Pro

Pieter
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=217700\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Exhibition Fibre is a nice paper but falls in the category of a lot of OBA. What is worse is the OBA is not only in the base but also in the coating, I'm told. If true the dissipation of the OBA will present problems for permanence. Controlling the coating's thickness makes it doubtful that any consistency between amount of OBA at any given area will be the same, nor between batches.

[kers]

Pieter-
Might I ask what standards HP is requiring before replacing your pressure rollers these days?  Did they have you send them a sample print?  Did it need to be on HP media?
Thanks,
Ron
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I send them a print on innova Gloss F. Told them that according to the specs the printer should be able to be printing media up to .7 mm but  already i got marks on HP's smooth fine art.

Also by making replace-parts they acknowledge that the former parts had problems

In the Netherlands - where I live_ they did not make any problems about  the replacements

Tom - you will find a long forum discussion on the Z3100 rolller marks and a picture of the new pinch rollers here: [a href=\"http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=21426&hl=rollers&st=130]http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index....=rollers&st=130[/url]

[kers]

Exhibition Fibre is a nice paper but falls in the category of a lot of OBA. What is worse is the OBA is not only in the base but also in the coating, I'm told. If true the dissipation of the OBA will present problems for permanence. Controlling the coating's thickness makes it doubtful that any consistency between amount of OBA at any given area will be the same, nor between batches.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=217772\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Hello Neil,

OBA means 'optical brighteners added'?

So if i understand from your posts I will have to try the new Hahnemuhle FineArt Baryta
325 gsm made from 100% alpha-Cellulose ? being the best alternative without oba.

Does its appearance comes close to the Epson Paper?
Pieter

[guerillary]

Now that my Z3100 has been updated with new the pinch rollers and starwheel assembly,I've had a chance to print quite a bit with the Harman glossy FB AI paper. The Z3100 now prints perfectly with no marks of any kind on it.

Until now I've been using either Hahnemuhle Photo Rag 308 or Fine Art Pearl for most of my prints. I'll still use the 308 for certain things, but I'll never run the FAP through my printer again. When you look at the prints side by side (Harman and FAP) it's unbelievable how much more pleasing the Harman prints are. Aside from the surface which is smooth as silk compared to the FAP, the images just look more detailed and 3 dimensional. The difference is so noticable that I actually went to a local gallery that sells my prints and took 2 home to reprint. Looking at them side by side has been a real eye opener.  There is NO comparison.

I've tried the Hahnemuhle baryta paper which is a lot better than the FAP, but not as nice overall as the Harman imo. The surface of the Hahnemuhle baryta doesn't seem as fragile as the Harman though. The Harman won't stand up to careless handling.

If inkjet printing has gotten this good, I can't help wondering what we'll have at our disposal in the future as the technology matures even more.

Fine art pearl is an incredible stock for color photography, even in comparison to Harman FB gloss.  I'd like to say it ultimately comes down to what works best for your subject - but you also have to consider Harman has OBAs.  When it comes to b&w though, I agree the Harman is gorgeous; but so are Ilford GFS, Harman Matte FB and Hahnemuhle Photo Rag Bright White... Again, if you throw out OBAs as an issue; just comes down to what's appropriate for your subject.

Ironically, I'm shocked how unpleased I am with b&w on Photo Rag Pearl.  Seems to present an unusual level of contrast and lack of separation.  How in the world it looks so great for color and hardly so for b&w is beyond me.

Photo Rag Pearl can also be a real pain to print on when it comes to marks, banding, bronzing and other joys.  The other night I effortlessly printed a color portrait on Harman Gloss but felt like it was too commercial looking, if that makes sense.  Then I went through hell getting a clean print of the same shot on Photo Rag Pearl.  But boy was I happy with the results when it came through.  Love that paper (for color).

The only stock I've felt was useless to date is Epson's Exhibition Fiber.  What an expensive let-down.  B&W prints I made a year ago on it are shifting and showing those micro-cracks so many claim not to exist.  What crap.  I wanted to dig it so bad but at this point I'd imagine even the biggest, Epson-loving pros have quietly ran from that stock.

[Geoff Wittig]

Ironically, I'm shocked how unpleased I am with b&w on Photo Rag Pearl.  Seems to present an unusual level of contrast and lack of separation.  How in the world it looks so great for color and hardly so for b&w is beyond me.

Photo Rag Pearl can also be a real pain to print on when it comes to marks, banding, bronzing and other joys.  The other night I effortlessly printed a color portrait on Harman Gloss but felt like it was too commercial looking, if that makes sense.  Then I went through hell getting a clean print of the same shot on Photo Rag Pearl.  But boy was I happy with the results when it came through.  Love that paper (for color).

What printer are you using? I have found Hahnemuhle's Photo rag pearl to be really good for black & white prints on my HP Z3100. No banding, no marks, excellent tonal separation. Just the faintest hint of bronzing, barely noticeable at steep reflection angles. D-max is pretty good, not as dark as I get on HP pro satin, but lots better than any matte paper.

[guerillary]

What printer are you using? I have found Hahnemuhle's Photo rag pearl to be really good for black & white prints on my HP Z3100. No banding, no marks, excellent tonal separation. Just the faintest hint of bronzing, barely noticeable at steep reflection angles. D-max is pretty good, not as dark as I get on HP pro satin, but lots better than any matte paper.

I love HPRP and can get great prints from it these days but it gets a bit tricky on the 3800.  I occasionally make paper feed adjustments to avoid banding, yet don't run into this issue using Harman, Ilford or Epson stocks.  I've noticed the bronzing you mention yet see this on many stocks, although it's nearly non-existent on Harman.  Im able to manage the issue on Photo Rag Pearl well these days.  My opinion is tonal separation ain't great on Photo Rag Pearl B&W prints.  The issue is primarily a lack of highlight and shadow detail.  It's my favorite stock for color though.  How it looks so good to me in color but not B&W is beyond me.  I'm using Epson's ABW with Chan's profile for the stock.  His profiles have worked great for me on other stocks and he's so adept with the 3800 that I assume the issue is the stock and not his profile.

My current favorites for B&W are Harman FG Gloss and Matte as well as Ilford Gold Fiber Silk.  Photo Rag Bright White can also be a great stock for hi-con, deep-matte-black looks but here we have yet another odd matter... on this stock it's the color that lacks separation while the B&W can look nice for certain subjects.  Earthy color tones have separation issues on Photo Rag Bright White.