Epson Exhibition Fiber Paper Revisited

[bjanes]

Back in 2008 Mark Dubovoy reviewed Epson Exhibition Fiber paper favorably and, in an addendum, Michael added comments that were somewhat less favorable and complained about the high pricing of the then new paper. At that time, one of Michael's favorites, Ilford Gold Fiber Silk (GFS) Barytas, was more favorably priced. Both authors were worried that the Epson paper employed optical brighteners that could possibly affect longevity unfavorably.

In 2013 the pricing appears more favorable vis-à-vis the Ilford product as shown in the table below, which lists the current pricing at B&H.

I currently have been using Epson Ultra Premium Luster on my Epson 3880 but want to try something new and have ordered a box of the Epson paper and am also considering GFS. The pricing differential is no longer significant. Any comments would be appreciated. I don't have profiling ability and have been using the Epson profiles, and would appreciate any advice on what profile would be best.

Regards,

Bill

 

[Mark D Segal]

Hi Bill,

I prefer Ilford GFS - I find it more neutral and if it has any OBA at all, it would appear to be insignificant. I created my own profile, but Ilford's canned profiles for this paper, at least with Epson 4900, are now pretty good. They have improved their profiles substantially over the years. A lot of this is personal taste and I recommend you try a range of photos on both and see which "look and feel" you like better.

Mark

[fike]

I also like the Ilford Gold Fiber Silk quite a lot, but I have found that prints are quite fragile, particularly immediately after printing.  I use Epson Premium Luster for proofing and experimenting and IGFS for all my final prints for exhibition.

[Mark D Segal]

I also like the Ilford Gold Fiber Silk quite a lot, but I have found that prints are quite fragile, particularly immediately after printing.  I use Epson Premium Luster for proofing and experimenting and IGFS for all my final prints for exhibition.

Within a few hours the ink "hardens" on GFS and the inked surface is really very scratch resistant. However, the un-inked borders are never scratch resistant so care is needed handling them.

[DeanChriss]

Within a few hours the ink "hardens" on GFS and the inked surface is really very scratch resistant. However, the un-inked borders are never scratch resistant so care is needed handling them.

I'd second that, especially the part about the un-inked surface being very prone to showing scuffs and other marks.

It's all subjective, but I think some images look better on GFS, some look better on Epson Exhibition Fiber, and others look best on mat finished papers with either bright or warmer "natural" white points. FWFW I use mostly GFS (but switching to Canson Baryta Photographique), EEF, and Epson Hot Press Bright and Epson Hot Press Natural.

Added - Canson Platine Fibre Rag is also very nice, but I think the surface texture is a bit much for most subjects. Where it works, the paper is excellent. Also, manufacturer profiles for all of the papers I mentioned seem alright on the Epson 7900, especially the EEF profile. I'd assume profiles for other printers would be similarly accurate but YMMV.

[Mark D Segal]

Canson Baryta Photographique and Ilford GFS are pretty much interchangeable. You can use the same profile on both and the prints look really close to identical.

[AFairley]

I prefer the colder whites of the EEF.  The GFS was just a tad too warm for color work for my taste.

[fike]

I'd second that, especially the part about the un-inked surface being very prone to showing scuffs and other marks.
...

Yep, I seen IGFS sheets scratched before I even took them out of the box.  It needs to be handled very carefully until it has been printed and dried completely.  I generally lay them out to dry for days before handling them further.

[Ernst Dinkla]

Both authors were worried that the Epson paper employed optical brighteners that could possibly affect longevity unfavorably.

In this case they had the right suspicion. It did worse than any other OBA paper since in Aardenburg Imaging testing. One of the examples where the OBA degradation did not deliver a "natural" paper white in the end but something worse. In the 6 tests the worst example showed the Lab b shifting from something like -5 to +5.7 and all shifted at least 8 Delta E on the paper white.  The paper white shifted worse than any of the color patches. To get an idea Hahnemühle Bamboo has a paper white color with b 5.2

The IGFS showed far better paper white constancy in time.

--
Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst

http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
July 2013, 500+ inkjet media white spectral plots.

[JohnBrew]

I did some 17" prints with EEF and I was really pleased with the results. Back then the paper was dirt cheap - I actually think the dealer was trying to unload it after the OBA reports got out. I haven't printed with it since, but I have a friend who still uses it for all his exhibition prints and swears by it. I asked him if he was worried about OBA's and he said he didn't give a ___!

[nairb]

I'm just now reprinting two images (12x18") on GFS with my 9880 off a 44" roll because the first one's were full of hairline scratches which are most visible through the dark tones (usually dark skies in B&W or dark night images). I've been using GFS for 4 years now and also proof with Epson Lustre.

The hairline scratches coming right off the roll (parallel to the paper path) is a constant issue with this paper and has resulted in a lot of waste in my time using it. The issue only occasionally shows up on 13x19 cut sheets but is ever present on rolls, particularly in the first 5-10 feet.

Does anyone know if the Canson suffers from the same problem?

(edit) - I've been considering other papers such as the exhibition fibre (partially due to epson brushing off all my testing to try to resolve problems with my 4880 because I wasn't using their papers), but haven't yet tried it. I like the look of the GFS but it's such a pain to deal with as it is far more delicate than the lustre (even after letting it dry for a long time), and the constant hairline scratch issue, which is why I'm curious if the Canson is just as delicate.

[Mark D Segal]

I'm just now reprinting two images (12x18") on GFS with my 9880 off a 44" roll because the first one's were full of hairline scratches which are most visible through the dark tones (usually dark skies in B&W or dark night images). I've been using GFS for 4 years now and also proof with Epson Lustre.

The hairline scratches coming right off the roll (parallel to the paper path) is a constant issue with this paper and has resulted in a lot of waste in my time using it. The issue only occasionally shows up on 13x19 cut sheets but is ever present on rolls, particularly in the first 5-10 feet.

Does anyone know if the Canson suffers from the same problem?

(edit) - I've been considering other papers such as the exhibition fibre (partially due to epson brushing off all my testing to try to resolve problems with my 4880 because I wasn't using their papers), but haven't yet tried it. I like the look of the GFS but it's such a pain to deal with as it is far more delicate than the lustre (even after letting it dry for a long time) which is why I'm curious if the Canson is just as delicate.

You may want to check your roll paper settings or roll paper path, because what you are describing is unlikely to be the paper. Paper is normally manufactured in absolutely gigantic rolls, then cut to fit for the size and packaging specs. (Saw it myself in the erstwhile Agfa works at Leverkusen back in the 1950s and this has unlikely changed much over the decades.) The notion that the first five or ten feet of a consumer-sized roll of paper would be systematically scratched from the factory is not credible. The one roll of IGFS I've used in my 4900 has been fine from the get-go. But I normally print on sheets, also fine.

As for drying and hardening time, over-night is the maximum time likely to be necessary save for exceptionally humid conditions. Several hours is usually adequate for normal handling, but non-inked surfaces always need special care.

[nairb]

This is a problem with the paper and has shown up on my 4880, 9880, and previously a 9900 and 11880 (where I had large prints done in the past) and is most often an issue with a particular black and white panorama with the moon in the sky. The image is 12x48" long and and the hairline scratches although more prone to showing up early in the roll (in that case a 17" roll), do show up randomly and can be anywhere from 1/2 to 4 inches long.

If you do a search you'll find others who have had the same experiences with hairline scratches and as stated above, this was also the experience of the company who did my large format images before I got my own 44" printer.

[Mark D Segal]

Have you raised it with Ilford and gotten any response?

[nairb]

No I haven't.

After 4 years and probably 40-60 rolls gone through, as well as hearing the experience of others with this paper, I accepted that is it just part of the experience with this paper on rolls. As I said, it almost never shows up on cut sheet (of which I've gone through maybe 20-30 boxes of 50 sheets of 13x19"). With the print I described, roughly 1 in 4 or 5 is discarded/destroyed due to the scratches (people can be particularly picky when paying $950 for a print) and I've sold almost 50 of those now not including the two smaller sizes. Yes occasionally I will get a roll that is clean and clear of these scratches all the way through, but that's a rarity.

It's not now often that much of an issue as I've had plenty of experience with it, but now that I'm (as of August) using rolls wider than 17" and seeing the same thing, I'm interested to hear others experiences with similar paper like the Canson.

[Mark D Segal]

Really very puzzling because the rolls and the sheets are most likely cut from the same paper batches, but I may be incorrect about that. It's unfortunate that you didn't complain to Ilford so that they could either explain it or correct it or both; but as I've said, not something I've noticed, and I've been printing with this stuff since it was first available in Canada.

[cortlander]

I think Epson has a 25% rebate on EEF and some others till the end of the year in the 13x19 size. I bought some, though I continue to use Canson Baryta in the 17x22 size.

[howardm]

I think Epson has a 25% rebate on EEF and some others till the end of the year in the 13x19 size. I bought some, though I continue to use Canson Baryta in the 17x22 size.

Yes, Epson has a rebate on their SigWorthy papers (and I think EEF is part of that) where you get a discount if you buy 5 packs.  There is also currently a Canson rebate (10% off) till end of year (just missed the 20% off rebate by a few days).

[Mark D Segal]

One wonders whether all these sales, combined with the recent upheavals at Ilford Imaging GmBH, combined with an apparent slow-down in the production of new printer models are precursors of the demise of the printing era.

[howardm]

One wonders whether all these sales, combined with the recent upheavals at Ilford Imaging GmBH, combined with an apparent slow-down in the production of new printer models are precursors of the demise of the printing era.

Not that I know anything but it seems like they very often have sales on paper so that's nothing 'new' although w/ the advent of iPads and the like, there is even less incentive to print (ala mass market (it'd be interesting to see sales figures for low-end printers and CVS kiosk printing)), who knows what the issue w/ Ilford is/was and just like cameras, things have gotten good enough to 'so good' that until there is something disruptive, the camera and printer makers are shuffling deck chairs to introduce 'new and improved' enough to warrant stepping up.