Crystalline and Epson Canvas Gloss are made by the same contractor. Right now the substrates and surface qualities seem identical. But if I use my Crystalline profile to make the same print on both canvases, the Epson canvas comes out MUCH punchier with considerably better d-max and much more brilliant highlights. So they are definitely not the same product.
I find this very interesting, so do you have a preference between these two or any other thoughts on how they compare (I would be using them on an 8300)?
The better d-max comment is surprising because when I compare the manufacturer-supplied 4900 profiles for Epson Gloss & BC Crystalline, the BC profile looks substantially better. The Epson profile has the black point at L*=17, which is not much better than typical matte papers. Overall gamut in the Epson profile is better than you would expect from a matte surface, but it still falls short of the BC profile. The Epson profile has a higher white point (you could be right about OBA's), and its gamut extends further into the light tones. But it comes up short in the darker colors, which tends to be more limiting for actual printing in my experience.
A black point of L*=17 is not at all what I would expect from a "gloss" surface, so I had pretty much written the Epson canvas off. So are these difference real or is it just a matter of Epson putting out a lousy profile?
I've been researching options for a gloss canvas to start using, and was thinking about trying out the BC Crystalline but they're currently out of sample rolls (and also 36" rolls which is what I would end up purchasing). So now I'm wondering if I should give the Epson canvas a try. I'm not necessarily against reasonable use of OBA's, but if it's similar to the Exhibition Fibre that might be cause for concern since that paper has not held up well in permanance testing (and is a little too cool for my taste also).