Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Review of Breathing Color's Crystalline Glossy Canvas  (Read 9874 times)

Paul2660

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4067
    • Photos of Arkansas
Review of Breathing Color's Crystalline Glossy Canvas
« on: October 13, 2011, 01:53:02 pm »

I have posted a review on my website of the the latest release, hopefully soon to be full production of Crystalline.
You can find it here:

http://photosofarkansas.com/2011/10/review-of-breathing-colors-crystalline-glossy-canvas-one-photographers-perspective

I feel this by far the best glossy canvas I have used in the past few years, and will provide some amazing prints.

Paul Caldwell
www.photosofarkansas.com

Logged
Paul Caldwell
Little Rock, Arkansas U.S.
www.photosofarkansas.com

fetish

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 154
Re: Review of Breathing Color's Crystalline Glossy Canvas
« Reply #1 on: October 13, 2011, 02:21:31 pm »

Excellent review Paul.

Now you've tempted me to email BC for some test rolls to play with.  ;D
Logged

Light Seeker

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 255
Re: Review of Breathing Color's Crystalline Glossy Canvas
« Reply #2 on: October 14, 2011, 01:34:41 pm »

Paul, thank you for the review. You've spoken to many of the issues / concerns that came up when this canvas was first out.

I am still skeptical about how realistic it will be to sell a fine art canvas print without coating it, but I would love to be proven wrong. Out of curiosity, have you tried coating Crystalline with Timeless and if so, were you able to match the level of gloss?

I usually mix Timeless 50% gloss and 50% matte when I coat Lyve, and I get a very natural "matte" look with minimal sheen. For prints where I want more punch I've tried 75% gloss and 25% matte which gives me a DMax of ~ L* 16.3. A Dmax around 10 would certainly be nice, and I will be one of those picking up a 17" sample roll.

Terry.
Logged

ternst

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 427
Re: Review of Breathing Color's Crystalline Glossy Canvas
« Reply #3 on: October 14, 2011, 03:40:19 pm »

Thanks for the report Paul. I tried a big roll of the new canvas a few weeks ago and was pleased with the results before coating, although I had some issues when coating with Glamour II (the ink came off - oops!). I have not tried Timeless yet.

I wonder about not coating this canvas since Breathing Color themselves says multiple times on their web site that you really DO need to coat it in order for the canvas to be archival and durable.

<<While varnish is not required, it is always recommended if your goal is to maximize longevity>>

<<RECOMMENDATIONS
To maximize longevity, Breathing Color always recommends applying a print varnish to all aqueous canvas prints>>

And here are their test results - about half as good as Lyve -

<<Crystalline has been longevity tested and the results are as follows:  When no varnish is applied, Crystalline has a life span of approximately 55 years before deterioration may begin (this is approximately half the life span of our Lyve and Chromata White canvases which are both independently archival certified for 100+ years.  When our Timeless print varnish is applied, Crystalline's life span will improve to approximately 75 years before deterioration may begin.  >>

I would LOVE to be able to skip the coating process and make all my big canvas prints on crystalline, but is this really a good idea? Should I charge my customers half the normal price?
Logged

Paul2660

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4067
    • Photos of Arkansas
Re: Review of Breathing Color's Crystalline Glossy Canvas
« Reply #4 on: October 14, 2011, 07:42:59 pm »

Terry: good question on the Timeless.  I am going to spray next week on a test print I made.  I am hoping that I might be able to make
one pass (to me one pass is up and down, and then switching the nozzle and going across).  With Lyve or Chromata White I do this three times usually letting the print dry 30 minutes between spraying.  I will report back on results. 

I feel that the Dmax of Crystalline is slightly better than the results I get with Lyve/Timeless MK or PK ink.  As I remember  in one of my conversations with BColor they have determined that also.

Tim: you bring up a good question and one that I guess everyone has to answer to their own satisfaction.  I personally feel that 55 years is a pretty good timeframe, and would not have any problems telling a customer that.  However I also feel that the notes on the web were based on the earlier versions of Crystalline, which shipped way back in March/April.  They are on their 8th or 9th iteration of Crystalline and I know that the coating they used in March, was different (nowhere near as deep and for sure not as durable as the canvas I am printing on now) I also think that the canvas base has also changed.  The cost per foot is just a bit higher as I remember than a Lyve/Timeless solution so I sure wouldn't charge any less.   As you have seen it makes a beautiful print.

The other issue for me is that since I switched to Timeless last year, I find it harder to get a perfect coating.  To me Glamour II doesn't create anywhere near as rich a gloss.  It's glossy, but not like Timeless.  I was amazed at the difference when I first sprayed on Timeless.  However since Timeless doesn't have the leveling capabilities of Glamour II, it's much harder (for me with a Wagner Control Spray plus anyway) to lay down a perfectly even coat.   I understand what is going on, and have tried many techniques to correct for it, but I usually will see on my larger prints 30 x 45 or larger some areas where the Timeless didn't lay down just right and thus the gloss is not as deep.  You see this effect best when you look down the print in good light not head on.   It's minor and the vast majority of people don't see it, but I do.  I have considered moving to the Fuji Sprayers to see if I could get a better coating, but right now I am going to stay with Crystalline if it makes to prime time.  For me the real test was the how well it stretched and had no issues at all.

Paul Caldwell
Logged
Paul Caldwell
Little Rock, Arkansas U.S.
www.photosofarkansas.com

ternst

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 427
Re: Review of Breathing Color's Crystalline Glossy Canvas
« Reply #5 on: October 14, 2011, 08:12:30 pm »

Here is another comment by BC - seems the gloss is not as sharp as the older matte - I always thought it would be the other way around, although the gloss has a more luster-like surface while Lyve has a pretty smooth coating so I guess that would make sense.

<<Crystalline actually does have a higher dmax and more dense colors overall.  Lyve has better sharpness and resolution however and will show more fine detail. >>
Logged

Paul2660

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4067
    • Photos of Arkansas
Re: Review of Breathing Color's Crystalline Glossy Canvas
« Reply #6 on: October 16, 2011, 03:12:12 pm »

I saw that on their site on the sharpness, but I feel that the results at 1440 from a 9880 are as detailed as anything I have gotten from Chromata White or Lyve.  It might be my older eyes ;)  but even a 40  x 60 seemed very sharp.  I always like the details I could get from Lyve, and so far feel that Crystalline is very similar.

Paul
Logged
Paul Caldwell
Little Rock, Arkansas U.S.
www.photosofarkansas.com

louoates

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 836
    • Lou Oates Photography
Re: Review of Breathing Color's Crystalline Glossy Canvas
« Reply #7 on: October 16, 2011, 04:11:26 pm »

Since most of the canvases I print are for a very price-sensitive market I'd love to be able to use a canvas I wouldn't have to seal. If it could be stretched and handled without risk of damage at that stage I'd go for it. 
Logged

MHMG

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1285
Re: Review of Breathing Color's Crystalline Glossy Canvas
« Reply #8 on: October 16, 2011, 05:44:55 pm »


And here are their test results - about half as good as Lyve -

<<Crystalline has been longevity tested and the results are as follows:  When no varnish is applied, Crystalline has a life span of approximately 55 years before deterioration may begin (this is approximately half the life span of our Lyve and Chromata White canvases which are both independently archival certified for 100+ years.  When our Timeless print varnish is applied, Crystalline's life span will improve to approximately 75 years before deterioration may begin.  >>


And here is their disclaimer:

"*Note: Actual print stability will vary according to media, printed image, display conditions, light intensity and atmospheric conditions. Breathing Color does not guarantee the longevity of prints. For maximum print life display all prints under glass or lamination or properly store them. All of the descriptive information and recommendations for the use of Breathing Color products should be used only as a guide. Furnishing such information and recommendations shall in no event constitute a warranty of any kind by Breathing Color. All purchasers of Breathing Color products shall independently determine the suitability of the material for the purpose for which it is purchased. Seller’s and manufacturer’s only obligation shall be to replace such quantity of the product proved to be defective. Neither the seller nor manufacturer shall be liable either in tort or in contract for any loss or damage, direct, incidental or consequential (Including loss of profits or revenue) arising out of the use of or the inability to use the product. No statement or recommendation not contained herein shall have any force or effect unless in agreement signed by officers of seller and manufacturer."

Their wording, "before deterioration may begin", is also a rather peculiar way of describing any durability test result. Chemical and physical deterioration always begins at day one. One might assume they mean "before any visually noticeable changes occur", but without any description of the testing that was done, which lab performed the testing, nor any description of the criteria involved in the testing (ie. are we talking about the media or media with printed image, in which case what printer, inks, etc., were used in testing?), the claimed result is precisely as valid as the disclaimer  ::)

cheers,
Mark
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up