Weird behaviour from Hahnemühle Photo Silk Baryta an Vivera inks

[Geraldo Garcia]

Although I got some samples earlier this year, I just printed on those using the Canon IPF 8400 and the canned profile (with excellent results BTW).
As I finally got a roll to actually test and print, I proceeded to linearize and create my custom profiles for my printers (Canon IPF 8400 and HP Z3200PS).
At first I thought something was wrong with my Z3200 as the colors of the calibration/linearization patch were a bit off to my eye, so were the colors of the profiling target. I checked everything I could on my side and no user error was found. The generated profile had a weird shape and a relatively small volume (for a glossy/luster paper). I decided to test the whole process again recalibrating and reprofiling a different glossy paper and got a very good (as expected) profile.
So, I concluded, it is not a malfunction on the printer/spectrophotometer or user error. It must be the paper.
To test that I repeated the procedure, this time with the Canon IPF 8400 and, to my surprise, it produced an excellent profile with a huge volume (quite like the Canson Baryta Photographique).
Just for the sake of understanding what was happening I compared my custom profiles to the canned profiles provided by Hahnemühle (for both printers) and they are quite close! The canned profile for the Z3200 also has the weird shape and small volume.
What is weird is that the Hahnemühle's Photo Silk Baryta is a very close "cousin" of the Canson Baryrta Photographique, both behave the same way on the Canon IPF 8400 but completely different on the HP Z3200. As it is now I will only use it on the Canon.
Has anyone else noticed that?

[deanwork]

I have have had good results with all the Hah fiber gloss media on the Z but I haven't tried that particular one.

Don't know what media setting you are using. It could be that Hah actually used the wrong media setting in generating their profile.

I would try some other media settings, such as fine art pearl less ink or fine art pearl more ink, photo baryta paper, etc. and see if these make any difference.

It seems to me that if you are seeing something odd in even your calibration target then it could be a media setting because something is way off.

john

[Geraldo Garcia]

I thought that too (forgot to mention) and created a custom paper setting and reprofiled with almost no improvement. I used "HP Baryte photo paper" as base setting.
Sure there might be a better setting and I should to try some others, but as it is right now I will probably avoid wasting more paper and just print it on the Canon.

[Ernst Dinkla]

I have have had good results with all the Hah fiber gloss media on the Z but I haven't tried that particular one.

Don't know what media setting you are using. It could be that Hah actually used the wrong media setting in generating their profile.

I would try some other media settings, such as fine art pearl less ink or fine art pearl more ink, photo baryta paper, etc. and see if these make any difference.

It seems to me that if you are seeing something odd in even your calibration target then it could be a media setting because something is way off.

john

I was actually waiting for this thread.

John, I recall you had a bad experience with the IGFS on the Z3100 and preferred the Hahanemühle fibers/barytas:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=44962.10;wap2

It is more than likely that the Hahnemühle Silk Baryta comes from the same manufacturer the old and new IGPFS have their origin: Felix Schoeller.

Bronzing also affects profile target measuring BTW.

In that group of IGFS lookalikes I suspect there are two manufacturers: Felix Schoeller and Innova. The HP Zs might show the difference in the coating.

Not new, the now obsolete HP Baryte Satin Art did not work well with the Zs either as is also discussed in the thread I gave the link to. In that case a haze on the paper had to be wiped off and after that a varnish used. The Zs Gloss Enhancer does a splendid job on gloss papers that are compatible with the Vivera inks but can not compensate bronzing and gloss differential when they are not compatible. I am not sure what it is, the Epson Proofing White Semi-Matte showed bronzing as well with GE but in some cases it was less, same roll. I wonder whether a high humidity in the paper and the shop could improve the penetration of the inks in the coating and create a better gloss.

Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst

http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
December 2014 update, 700+ inkjet media white spectral plots

[deanwork]

That's right Ernst. With most all pk papers the Z is great and a little better than the Canon ( although I spray all my pk prints with the Hahnemuhle protective spray that makes the Canon prints very smooth also).  RC media on the Z is excellent.

But there are a few of them the Ilford Baryta and the Canson Baryta and Platine, that just show that bronzing that just doesn't exist with the Epson and Canon inks. Ironically that HP baryta also showed this bronzing to a degree which was kind of weird, so I never used that one either on this printer.

John

[Mark Lindquist]

I thought that too (forgot to mention) and created a custom paper setting and reprofiled with almost no improvement. I used "HP Baryte photo paper" as base setting.
Sure there might be a better setting and I should to try some others, but as it is right now I will probably avoid wasting more paper and just print it on the Canon.

It is ironic, Geraldo, how so many options for profiling and testing to get just the right profile for a specific paper becomes a big waste of time, paper and ink.  Even with the "working with non-hp papers" article and charts, we're largely on our own to figure it out.  Oddly, the companies that sell papers rarely, if ever have any profiles at all for the HP Z printers and mostly give no advice about profiling, either.

I had hoped that the custom profiles that were on the unnofficial HP Wiki would increase, but alas, not much has happened in a long time, and it appears the wiki is on its way out now, as well.

I don't blame you for just moving to the Canon to just get the job done.  Doing the testing is sometimes amazingly time consuming and materials consuming as well.  It's awesome to get the right result, but discouraging to test and test and be less than impressed by the output. 

My experience is that using the Quad ink settings (Fine Art Pearl, more ink, GE on) is frequently the best setting for the satin papers as a whole.  Just my take on it, FWIW.