Photos for testing papers

[OmerYair]

Hello,

I just started my photography BFA and my classmates and I want to try some papers before settling on preferred one(s). What photos should we print to test a paper? How do you suggest us to test the papers?

We have Epson printers on our lab (9/4/3800).

One of our students is selling TECCO papers - any opinion about them in comparison to other papers (more specifically regarding baryta papers)?

The following papers are on the sample list we're about to order:
Ilford Gold Fibre Silk
Canson Edition Etching Rag 310gsm
Canson Arches B F K Rives 310gsm
Canson Arches Velin Museum Rag 250gsm
Canson Rag Photographique 210gsm
Canson Rag Photographique 310gsm
Canson PhotoGlossy Premium RC
Canson PhotoSatin Premium RC
Canson Arches Aquarelle Rag 240
Canson Montval Aquarelle 310
Canson Platine Fibre Rag 310
Canson Baryta Photographique 310
Canson Photo HighGloss Premium RC 315
Canson Mi Teintes 170gsm
Hahnemuhle Fine Art Pearl 285
Hahnemuhle Photo Rag Satin 310
Hahnemuhle Photo Rag Baryta 315
Hahnemuhle Photo Rag Pearl 320
Hahnemuhle Fine Art Baryta 325
Hahnemuhle Baryta FB 350
Hahnemuhle Daguerre Canvas 400
Hahnemuhle Monet Canvas 410

Should we add any other papers?

[shewhorn]

I have a number of things I use to evaluate papers, a number of which are my own photos and test charts I've made for my own specific needs but one of my standard test prints that I always use is Bill Atkinson's Lab Test Page. Accurate reproduction of those yellow flowers has become an obsession of mine!

[Alan Goldhammer]

See Jack Flesher's essay here (includes a good test print):  http://www.outbackprint.com/printinginsights/pi049/essay.html

[sm906]

I do it the same way as shewhorn just pointed out. I am using some of the Bill Atkinson test images and some of my own images of which I know how they should look on paper and how can look on paper.

Tecco is in the proofing paper market for a very long time, just recently they started to produce dedicated fine art papers. So using their papers is a good choice for proofing and saving money. When I tested many different papers some time ago to know which papers fit my needs best, together HP Vivera inks in my case, I  i.e used the Moab ICC profiles to print on the Tecco paper (PM230 and PPM210). And for the matte papers this worked pretty well, which shows that they can partly mimic other papers. Though this does not work all the time and not for all Tecco papers, for many matte papers it does.
Today I am using the Tecco PPM210 as proofing paper for Moab Entrada Rag, and the Tecco Production SW265 Bright White is a good proofing choice for the Hahnemühle Harman Gloss Baryta for example (at least for me, each with its own ICC profile in this case). Though the Harman has still more 3D like depth, I know: If it looks good on the Tecco it will look excellent on the Harman.

Having in mind that the matte Tecco papers named above cost just a fraction of the Moab or Hahnemühle papers just give them a try, you almost can't go wrong with that.

Just some thoughts...

Thomas

[neile]

Check out my inkjet paper list (http://www.danecreekfolios.com/inkjet-paper-list/) and the Outback test image I use (details are on the inkjet paper list page). There's a nice writeup at http://www.outbackprint.com/printinginsights/pi049/essay.html on how to use it (which is I think what an earlier poster mentioned).

(Are there enough (brackets) in this message for you?

Neil

[TimBarker]

I'd add Ilford Smooth Pearl and Centurion Photo Silk which is even whiter.  I'm also trialling the Harman Canvas at the moment but need to get the profiling right (they don't have Canon Pro9000 profiles for it)

[RHPS]

Maybe it's too obvious to say this, but do make sure you have the right profiles for all the papers you are testing. The wrong profile will easily lead to the wrong conclusion.

[OmerYair]

Since we probably won't have enough samples to create the profiles ourself we'll use the manufacturer's profiles. Will it be enough to see the differences or are they too subtle and require accurate profiles?

The majority of our students have seen very few paper types (a couple of matte and luster papers from TECCO and Epson). I'm sure that even observing the texture with nothing printed will give them some ah-ha moments...

Unfortunately there is no distributer for Ilford papers (inkjet/pigment papers) and we are forced to order it from overseas. I already contacted shadesofpaper as they have sample packs for almost any type of paper - Is there any other store you recommend?

[RHPS]

To be honest I don't think you'll be looking for very subtle differences at this stage so manufacturers' profiles should be adequate. I think you have quite a long list to start with, so  it will be a question of short-listing a few based on the overall look and feel before you try to extract the ultimate performance.

[AaronPhotog]

The problem with the whole notion of testing papers using an image first, is that there may or may not be limitations to each of the profiles.  These profiles will be different in their gamuts and cutoff points.  

In my website at www.dygartphotography.com, in the technical section, you will find a method for testing how the paper responds to ink in an objective and comparative method that makes no use of profiles.  It enables direct comparisons based on ramps divided into 5% increments of each ink, from 5 to 100%.  The densities are then plotted and compared.  The only variable is the type of ink used for black, as appropriate for the paper (matte or glossy), and the dots per inch setting, so you can standardize or retest with different dpi settings.  I've tested a number of papers that way on my Epson 3800, keeping everything as standardized as possible.  More results will be posted shortly.

After you have determined how each paper takes ink without the influence of profiles or other quality adjustments, and compare the results, you will have far fewer papers to test with images, but at that point you definitely should do that.  Regardless of your density plots, other factors, such as curling, bronzing, metameric effects, lighting and surface reflection, the results of profiling, and your visual requirements and preferences, will help to further refine your selections.  It's good that we have so many choices out there, but it does help to narrow them down in a scientific manner before simply deciding that you like or don't like them.  The other thing to do is to check the testing agencies, such as Aardenberg and Wilhelm, to see whether a specific paper and ink combination can be expected to have good image longevity or not.

Aloha,
Aaron Dygart, Honolulu

[OmerYair]

Thanks for all the insights!

All major distributors sent me sample packages and a printed catalog. This is a summary of my thoughts after testing about 20 different papers from Epson, Canson, Hahnemuhle and TECCO.

Since I'm a student and money is an issue, I tested the papers for two objectives:
1. Cheap papers for daily assignments.
2. Best papers for end of year assignment.

To make a long story short, the paper of choice for the first objective is Epson Premium Luster. For less money and significantly less quality there are some TECCO alternatives.


The second objective is a hard one to judge and is based mostly on personal taste though I did managed to categorize the papers to some degree.

From the matte alternatives one must choose the paper based on the texture for the image. There are two great papers with subtle texture - Canson Rag Photographique and Hahnemuhle Photo Rag Ultra Smooth.

The glossy arena is full with great papers from all manufactures and it took me some time to break it down into useful insights.

The best papers to my taste look almost identical except for a tad difference in the paper's white: Canson Platine Fibre Rag and Hahnemuhle Photo Rag Pearl. The grainy texture of those papers is simply amazing!
A trio follows with a grainy texture though not as good - Canson Baryta Photographique and Harman by Hahnemuhle Gloss Baryta (both regular and warm).
The last papers on the list that are honorable to mention also look identical - Epson Traditional Photo Paper (also called Epson Exhibition Fiber) and Hahnemuhle Photo Rag Baryta. Both are great but I find the horizontal stripes texture they share a little bit annoying.