Z3100 & HP Hahnemuhle

[walter.sk]

What is your experience with the HP Hahnemuhle Smooth Fine Art and Textured Fine Art papers?  I'm thinking of getting a 24" roll of each, in the 310 GSM weight.

The questions that I have are:

1) Is there much difference between the 265 GSM and 310 GSM?  The prints will be framed behind glass.

2)  How fragile are the surfaces?

3)  How good are the blacks, dynamic range and color reproduction, compared with, say, Epson Enhanced Matte, HP Premier ID Satin, and Epson Premium Luster?  I know that matte has less contrast and not as deep a black as Satin or Luster, but how much less is the Hahnemuhle?

4)  How textured is the HP Hahnemuhle TFA paper?  I love the Bergger Pn33 paper, which is highly textured but does not come in rolls.

6) I believe these papers do not use optical brighteners.  How white are the whites, and are they neutral in tone?

6) Has anybody had pinch roller marks or starwheel marks with either of these papers in the 310 gsm variety (using the original rollers and starwheel assembly)?  I have not had problems yet with my original parts on the Z3100.

I know: a lot of questions, but I would appreciate answers to any that you can.

[Geoff Wittig]

Just my 2 cents-
Hahnemuhle smooth fine art is nice enough, but it left me a bit underwhelmed. Saturated reds are decent with the HP-supplied "canned" profile, not nearly as good with the profile I generated with the built-in spectro. D-max is pretty good for a cotton rag paper, but it's just not in the same league as what you get on Epson premium luster or HP satin. Paper white is mildly warm, pretty close to that of Epson Ultrasmooth fine art. I got a roll as part of HP's original rebate offer, but wasn't impressed enough to lay out my own cash for any more.

I haven't tried Hahnemuhle textured fine art.

As an alternative, you might want to consider Hahnemuhle photo rag satin. It's been around a few years, but prints from the Z3100 really "sing" on this paper. It's got the same subtle eggshell texture regular HPR has, and it looks the same going into the printer. Once ink hits the paper it takes on a subtle metallic sheen that improves tonal separation in the shadows and 3/4 tones. It works equally well for black & white or color prints. I have yet to find a matte/rag paper I like anywhere near as much.

[howseth]

I agree with Mr Wittig. Hahnemuhle Photo Rag Satin - Great paper.

[neil snape]

What is your experience with the HP Hahnemuhle Smooth Fine Art and Textured Fine Art papers?  I'm thinking of getting a 24" roll of each, in the 310 GSM weight.

The questions that I have are:

1) Is there much difference between the 265 GSM and 310 GSM?  The prints will be framed behind glass.

2)  How fragile are the surfaces?

3)  How good are the blacks, dynamic range and color reproduction, compared with, say, Epson Enhanced Matte, HP Premier ID Satin, and Epson Premium Luster?  I know that matte has less contrast and not as deep a black as Satin or Luster, but how much less is the Hahnemuhle?

4)  How textured is the HP Hahnemuhle TFA paper?  I love the Bergger Pn33 paper, which is highly textured but does not come in rolls.

6) I believe these papers do not use optical brighteners.  How white are the whites, and are they neutral in tone?

6) Has anybody had pinch roller marks or starwheel marks with either of these papers in the 310 gsm variety (using the original rollers and starwheel assembly)?  I have not had problems yet with my original parts on the Z3100.

I know: a lot of questions, but I would appreciate answers to any that you can.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=196535\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

1 No the framed look should be alike. In fact the thinner paper avoids any risk of head strikes, but the thicker paper avoids any handling marks.

2  I'd say fairly fragile. As all pigment prints go, they are easily scratched. Not to the paper white but a density line will occur if scratched.  I haven't seen any flaking on these papers, nor too many white spots from dust on the surface, although a brushing before printing a gallery print might be in order.

3 I find the blacks on the HP paper superior to OEM Hahnemuhle papers. I haven't done enough testing on all the surfaces, but did so for HPR compared to Smooth FA.   BTW, Smooth FA is similar to Epson EM.

4 I think it is quite textured. You should have had a sheet in the sample pack with the printer. I only printed some samples as textured media is not my cup of tea.

5  No they all have OBA. Not that much but enough to make the media brighter, substantially so compared to true rag non OBA media.


6 Nope, no wheel marks on the HP media. Come to think of it, other some funky experimentation with rigid FA sheets which showed the under side wheel marks, I never saw any marks on any fine art media. Surprisingly the heavy textured boards' surfaces were not affected by the transport.

[rdonson]

I really like the HP HSFA 265 paper. 

1) Is there much difference between the 265 GSM and 310 GSM?  The prints will be framed behind glass.

No noticeable difference that I can see.

2)  How fragile are the surfaces?

Can only speak about the HP HSFA 265.  About what you'd expect for pigments on an art surface.  Actually less fragile than satin or glossy with the gloss enhancer on them.

3)  How good are the blacks, dynamic range and color reproduction, compared with, say, Epson Enhanced Matte, HP Premier ID Satin, and Epson Premium Luster?  I know that matte has less contrast and not as deep a black as Satin or Luster, but how much less is the Hahnemuhle?

I'm very pleased with the results and the Z3100 uses quad blacks on this paper.  I'm very happy with the blacks.  The paper is optimized for the Z series and looks better than the stock HPR to me.  The look is superior to EEM IMHO.  Dynamic range will be less than ID Satin or EPL. 


6) I believe these papers do not use optical brighteners.  How white are the whites, and are they neutral in tone?

They use OBAs but Hahnemuhle doesn't believe its a negative.  Its just a choice that the printer makes.

Hahnemuhle's statement on OBAs


[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=196535\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

[walter.sk]

[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=196751\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Thanks for the link to the article.  Could you add it to the Z3100 Wikki page?  

I think I'm going to have to try the Photo Rag Satin based on 2 opinions here.  

Also, my curiosity about the HP Hahnemuhle Textured FAP is pushing me to try it as well, hoping to get as nice an effect as I do with the Bergger Pn33, which seems to add a dimension of depth to some images.  I hated the look of the texture on the blank sheets, but when I printed on them I was stunned.  The Bergger uses no brighteners, and certainly does not have the DMax of luster or satin papers but unless comparing them A-B, the other qualities of the Bergger come to the fore, diminishing the importance of the DMax for me.  I'm hoping the HP Hahnemuhle has similar properties at a lower cost.  Again, the Bergger comes in sheets only.

[rdonson]

I've used the Photo Rag Satin as well.  On certain color images it sparkles.  On certain toned or b&w it has a very interesting effect as well.  It doesn't work on everything but on some of my images it really makes them stand out.  Well worth experimenting with.  I had some left over from my Epson days and was pleasantly surprised by how well it worked on the Z3100.

I'll add the Hanhemuhle statement on OBAs to the Z3100 wiki tonight (with luck).