Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Printing: Printers, Papers and Inks => Topic started by: shewhorn on May 09, 2010, 02:04:36 pm
-
So I have a package of Lexjet photo metallic waiting for me at my studio. In speaking with Lexjet I asked them where the profiles were and they said "it can't be profiled". I asked why and they couldn't really give me a specific answer (I was looking for a more technical reason as to why not). The ex-engineer in me has A LOT of difficulty believing this. If it reflects light then you ought to be able to measure it. With the extremely high gloss of this paper I can understand why there might be some issues in doing so but still... it's just physics and you ought to be able to measure it somehow. Would the polarizing filter on the Spectrolino take care of this? I already own an i1 Pro and have a Spectroscan/Spectrolino package on the way. Surely it's possible as I've worked with numerous labs (RA-4 process) that have metallic paper (and to be fair I've never seen the Lexjet paper before so I have NO idea how it compares to RA-4 metallic prints) that have metallic prints and they all manage to provide ICC profiles for it so, assuming this Lexjet stuff is somewhere in the ballpark it is possible.
Cheers, Joe
-
Just a followup.... just printed out some test charts on the 8300 (generated via Argyll CMS) and scanned them in... yeah, the resulting profile is ummm... yeah. LOL Did it with an i1 Pro (UV Cut). My Spectroscan/Spectrolino should arrive in a few days. I'll try again with that. I'll post the ICC profile a little later if anyone wants to download it for a good laugh.
Cheers, Joe
-
I don’t know why it would be an issue as you point out. I doubt the Spectrolino will produce much difference however, the EyeOne is a respectable instrument.
-
I don’t know why it would be an issue as you point out. I doubt the Spectrolino will produce much difference however, the EyeOne is a respectable instrument.
Well, I just rescanned the target and it went MUCH better this time although a little more work is needed. I'm new to Argyll CMS and last night was the first time I've scanned a target in using readchart. With ProfileMaker Measure Tool I've experimented with different speeds when reading the strips and I've found that the measurement data where I scanned the strip in very slowly and smoothly had a MUCH higher dE than when I went faster. This doesn't make any sense to me at all but that's what the numbers said. Argyll on the other hand likes a VERY VERY VERY S L O W speed. Too fast and it barks at you. This morning I scanned the target in VERY slowly and it seemed much happier (less redos on each strip due to a read error). The other thing I did was to turn on the high resolution mode so that may have made a difference as well... I don't know. I suppose I could do another scan with the high res mode turned off (it's almost as fun as watching paint dry). I'm going to do three scans and average the results together and see what I get. I suspect I'll need to do a little bit of target optimization as I'm not getting a very linear response in the shadows. The color seems okay (potentially something funky going on in the blues... the profile could be a little smoother) but the luminance in the shadows is off. I used the default 918 patch target. If there are any Argyll users that have any tips for optimizing targets I'm all ears.
Cheers, Joe
-
And... with the profile I built this morning, while I wouldn't call it a good profile it's a HECK of a lot better than a non-existing profile and I'm extremely confident in saying that this paper can be profiled as I expected it could. At this point it's a matter of tweaking the profile and getting more familiar with Argyll CMS.
Cheers, Joe
-
I spoke to the Lexjet folks by phone today to see if they have sample packs of the paper available (they don't), and while I was on the phone the lady specifically mentioned the paper couldn't be profiled. She recommended using their Sunset Photo eSatin profile instead.
Glad to hear people are having some success profiling. I'll give it a whirl when my pack of 50 shows up using my crappy old Spyder 2. Who knows, maybe it'll be awesome
Neil
-
Joe, and anybody else that has their hands on this paper:
Can you describe the surface and level of metallic reflectivity? My sales rep said that it is designed as a carbon copy for Fuji metallic or Kodak Endura, but I believe that those both have polyester film bases. This one is supposed to be an alpha cellulose base, which I would assume means more texture. Is it as smooth and glossy as the other products? How does the reflectivity compare? I was told that they do not offer samples so that they may better serve their customers, and that I should order a roll to test and send it back if I don't like it with their "no questions asked" return policy. The only problem would be that I would be out shipping both directions. Frankly, I'd just prefer to hear if others have success printing with it and would like to see a sample to evaluate the surface. An easy return policy is nice, but I think samples are quite useful as well.
-
This is a cut/paste over from GetDPI from my experience with the new Lexjet metallic and Red River metallic medias: "Red River Paper has released their new Polar Pearl Metallic paper, and it is hyped up to be similar to Kodak's Endura Metallic. I picked up a 24" roll and am printing test images on my Epson 9800. A 24" x 100 roll is about US$236.
In a nutshell: The RR Polar Pearl shares some similarities with the Kodak Metallic, but it's not quite an exact replacement. Kodak's Metallic still has quite a bit more zing to it, and still remains quite unique. To be fair, the Polar Pearl does seem to be more "color balanced" and probably more suitable for portraits, and less prone to blow out the highlights as the Kodak Metallic is known to do if not careful. If it makes any sense, the Polar Pearl has more of a "gentle" metallic characteristic, thus "pearl." The surface of the Polar Pearl Metallic is a somewhat fragile paper, though probably not quite as much as Harman's Baryta. Spraying with Premier Art Shield is probably not recommended. The paper surface is very smooth and shiny; spraying leaves a light gritty feel. No idea as to longevity or archivability, though with pigmented inks we'll probably all be long gone or in retirement homes and unable to recall what the initial image looked like in the first place. (Guy will still be buying a new MFDB every other year...)
Lexjet is also releasing their Sunset Metallic Paper---which coincidentally is also a 10 mil, 255 gm paper like the Red River Polar Pearl. I'm placing bets it's the same paper but with a different label. Lexjet is more expensive (no surprise) and costs US$279 for a 24" x 100 roll. I have a 10" x 100 roll from Lexjet coming in soon. Both Lexjet and Red River will offer rolls up to 44" wide----so this is the big news in terms of offering something "similar" to Kodak Metallic without the 30" wide limitation. The RR Polar Pearl Metallic Paper looks good for both color and B&W images. At the very least, it is a good "glossy" media option. I'd expect similar of Lexjet's offering. I'm inclined to keep a 10" roll and 44" roll on hand in studio.
Lexjet says it is not really possible to generate an icc printer profile on their metallic, though Imageprint has one for Lexjet's paper I am told. Red River provides an icc printer profile and it does seem to be accurate. Again, if the the papers are the same, you can probably use the Red River icc profile on the Lexjet paper brand. I haven't tried generating my own icc profiles with Spyder 3 Print." The thread link: http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?t=11941 (http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?t=11941)
And now my UPDATE:
I'm positive these two metallic wanna-be papers are the SAME. Is it the oh-so coincidental 255 gm 10 mil similarity that tipped me off? well, maybe. But the clincher is that both rolls use that same damned white tape to secure the paper roll end onto the media---which literally has stronger adhesive properties than duct tape, forcing you to lose the first 12-17" of media because it is impossible to remove without damaging the paper where the tape has adhered. Whoever is the packing manufacturer needs to take some packing lessons from the folks over at Hahnemuhle. If you're a knuckle-dragger and like fixing things with duct tape, then you really need to find some of this adhesive white tape they use here---it makes duct tape look like Scotch magic tape.
I printed up one image on both the 24" Red River roll and the 10" roll of Lexjet. I cannot see a difference. I think the claims of being a carbon copy to Kodak's Endura metallic are more hype---or over-claims (is that a word?). Both share "metallic" qualities and are quite nice, but they are not Kodak Metallic clones. How about "super glossy replacement with metallic qualities?" Red River sells their Polar Pearl for less than Lexjet---no surprise, but only Lexjet offers the 10" rolls. Red River tells me that they will be offering 44" rolls soon. (I don't print sheets).
Oh---so the big TIP here is try using the icc printer profiles from Red River's Polar Pearl Metallic----it works fine on the Sunset Metallic paper. (I haven't tried generating my own profiles with Spyder 3 Print).
See the right hand column: http://www.redrivercatalog.com/browse/66lb...hoto-paper.html (http://www.redrivercatalog.com/browse/66lb-polar-pearl-metallic-inkjet-photo-paper.html)
Ken
p.s. I'm told that Lexjet will soon be posting icc profiles that they have been working on for their Sunset Metallic.
-
Wow, thanks for all the detail Ken! I wish I'd seen that yesterday before I placed my order from Lexjet. I guess I'll be out $10 in shipping costs, but you can bet I'll return the paper and order the smaller box from Red River.
Neil
-
Wow, thanks for all the detail Ken! I wish I'd seen that yesterday before I placed my order from Lexjet. I guess I'll be out $10 in shipping costs, but you can bet I'll return the paper and order the smaller box from Red River.
Neil
I can't tell you what the varying costs may be, and for s/h as well (I wasn't too happy with the $19.50 s/h charge from Lexjet for the 10" roll)---but apparently both Lexjet and Red River are offering different sizes of the media, which means patronizing both vendors depending on what you need.
I also just spoke with Lexjet, who will soon be releasing profiles that they have been working on for their metallic paper. Definitely worth a look.
-
I spoke to the Lexjet folks by phone today to see if they have sample packs of the paper available (they don't), and while I was on the phone the lady specifically mentioned the paper couldn't be profiled. She recommended using their Sunset Photo eSatin profile instead.
Glad to hear people are having some success profiling. I'll give it a whirl when my pack of 50 shows up using my crappy old Spyder 2. Who knows, maybe it'll be awesome
Neil
I do not understand what she is talking about. I have created profiles for my iPF Canon 9000 for both the plugin and the driver I don't see any issues with the profiles. Profiles appear close to profiles for the esatin but not the same, but I was using different media settings.
Doyle
-
I have been using the RR pearl since it came out. It works very well with portrait prints. I am local here in Dallas so I have got to work with RR on some other stuff they have tried with the Pearl paper.
For portraits this stuff looks awesome. I however am not a fan of the Pearl for color landscape shots....BUT if you have any landscape shots in B&W this stuff is freaking awesome. I printed out a B&W shot from Yosemite and my jaw dropped.
My portrait clients love this stuff and are willing to pay the extra cost for the paper. In fact 9 out of 10 people have preferred it over IGFS
-
Thanks, everybody for the info and feedback. To those who say it is not well suited for color landscapes, can you offer why? Does it have posterized shadows, blown out highlights, bronzing, etc.?
-
Thanks, everybody for the info and feedback. To those who say it is not well suited for color landscapes, can you offer why? Does it have posterized shadows, blown out highlights, bronzing, etc.?
Ken, thanks for that run down, most appreciated. I think "Metallic-ish" is a pretty decent description of it.
Cheers, Joe
-
I do not understand what she is talking about. I have created profiles for my iPF Canon 9000 for both the plugin and the driver I don't see any issues with the profiles. Profiles appear close to profiles for the esatin but not the same, but I was using different media settings.
Doyle
Doyle, what media type did you use? I'm on a 5100.
Neil
-
Doyle, what media type did you use? I'm on a 5100.
Neil
Not sure the Media Types are exactly the same, But I used Premium Gloss Paper 280.
Doyle
-
Thanks, everybody for the info and feedback. To those who say it is not well suited for color landscapes, can you offer why? Does it have posterized shadows, blown out highlights, bronzing, etc.?
I think its more of a persons taste. To me that metallic/pearl look works well for black and whites and portraits (makes skin tones look good most of the time). However I do not like what it does to skies and certain colors. This is just me
-
Thanks, natas. I was wondering if it was aesthetics or technical issues. I know that Peter Lik has built a very popular franchise off of large metallic landscape prints, and I have a couple of other landscape customers that are interested in trying metallic prints. I was just wondering if the inkjet metallic paper had properties that made it less suited to landscape than the Fuji/Kodak.
-
Finally received my Lexjet Metallic paper and the first several prints out of my Epson 9900 were pretty stunning. I used the Red River Metallic profile and Epsons premium gloss 250 media setting. My Lexjet rep tells me they are working on the profile and will have it out in a very short time.
-
Finally received my Lexjet Metallic paper and the first several prints out of my Epson 9900 were pretty stunning. I used the Red River Metallic profile and Epsons premium gloss 250 media setting. My Lexjet rep tells me they are working on the profile and will have it out in a very short time.
I spoke with someone at LexJet yesterday and they insist the paper is different than the Red River Metallic. I have a box of the Red River on the way as well, so will do a side-by-side comparison and see if I can spot a difference.
Neil
-
I spoke with someone at LexJet yesterday and they insist the paper is different than the Red River Metallic. I have a box of the Red River on the way as well, so will do a side-by-side comparison and see if I can spot a difference.
Neil
Hmmm.
Red River and Lexjet:
1. Both are 10 mil 255 gm papers.
2. Same feel. Same surface. Same tactile feeling. Indistinguishable in print---comparing same images printed on both media side-by-side
But the most damning evidence
3. Both are packaged EXACTLY alike, using that same damned little piece of white tape (super-adhesive strength) on the media itself, causing you to waste the first 12-18" of media. Duct tape ain't got anything on that white tape they use....
-
I printed my first RR metallic, 17x22 from Epson 3800, today. Used RR profile. The subject was a close up of a deep purple-red tulip that was backlit, brilliant range of colors. The background was out of focus (nice bokeh) medium to dark greens. My first impressions: the paper is thinner than I would like, the colors were gorgeous - very close to my monitor (high end calibrated), and the specular highlights seemed a touch gray. I soft proofed in PS without simulating paper color (recommended). If I print it again I would add a touch of contrast, the print seemed to loose a little but that may have been my initial post processing lacking and subsequent evaluation changed (in other words, I changed my mind).
Verdict: a very nice print considering it was the first. Will continue to use on a series of brightly colored single bud flowers on white background. It has lots of 'pop'.
Larry
-
FWIW: I just heard yesterday that Fineline Papers is about to introduce a metallic substrate with (surprise!) identical specs to the other two inkjet products.
-
Ok, my package of Red River Polar Metallic arrived today so I could finally do my own side-by-side comparison. I'm working off 8.5x11" cut sheets, not rolls.
At a high level the two papers are virtually indistinguishable. If you didn't see the two papers side-by-side on a wall nobody would be able to tell the difference between the two of them.
There are, however, some extremely subtle differences, at least in the samples I tried. My tests were using a set of 4 black and white images printed 4-up, as well as the standard test print image I use for my inkjet paper list (http://www.danecreekfolios.com/inkjet-paper-list/)test prints.
Here's the differences I see:
1) The base paper has a different tone. The Lexjet paper is ever so slightly more blue.
2) The Red River Polar Metallic has a very, very, very, slight increase in texture. It's still a smooth paper, but there's an orientation to the fibers of the paper (landscape on the 8.5x11" cut sheets I have), and it is very slightly more pronounced on the Red River
But these are extremely minor differences. In terms of the metallic quality and "wet look" both appear equal, and both are nice and a fun change from standard offerings. I asked my wife to confirm in a random arrangement of the sample prints, and she was also unable to see any difference between the two with respect to metallic and wet appearance.
When compared to Kodak Endura Metallic (which I also placed side-by-side), the Kodak is still king when it comes to metallic and wet look. It's also much more heavily textured on the base layer than either of the two inkjet offerings.
Neil
-
Would you believe? Yup, there's yet another metallic inkjet option. Mitsubishi Imaging offers its Grace Digital Pearlescent paper which is being distributed by www.itsupplies.com
I recently received a 24" roll of the Grace metallic paper from It Supplies. Surprisingly, it is not the same paper as that offered by Lexjet or Red River. It is also a 255 gsm, 10.4 mil paper. Typical of It Supplies, the Grace metallic paper was sent to me carefully packaged with a separate shipping box. No manly white duct tape on this media. The paper came wrapped in kraft paper, and then sealed in plastic.
The paper surface is a smooth pearl, but has sparkles---yes, sparkles is all I can think of---on the paper. Somewhat irridescent. It has similar metallic qualities, though not quite the same hyperbole is used by It Supplies in describing this metallic media. It is as fragile as the other papers offered by Lexjet and Red River, and actually glossier than either. I'm not sure about the sparkles yet, and probably need to print more. None of these new inkjet "metallic" papers approaches Kodak's Endura Metallic for pop and zing, but all are definitely easier to control for highlights and skin tones.
I have not taken the time to generate my own icc profiles, but did borrow the profiles for Red River's Polar Pearl here---and they really looked good on the Grace media.
Anyway, there's another good glossy option with metallic qualities with Grace Pearlescent from It Supplies. A 24" roll of Grace is less expensive than either Lexjet's Sunset Metallic or Red River's Polar Pearl papers. Shipping from www.itsupplies is free on orders over $100.
ken
-
If you want the Kodak Endura look from these new inkjet printable metallic papers then try Epson Claria dye ink. Pigment inks just don't cut it with this paper and look dull compared to the Claria prints. BO prints (with just a tiny bit of LM to adjust neutrality) made using QTR, a custom profile, and an Epson 1400 with Claria ink are outstanding. The image does not "sit" on top of the paper as with pigments, but rather is much closer in appearance to that of a silver image embedded in the emulsion of the print.
-
The paper surface is a smooth pearl, but has sparkles---yes, sparkles is all I can think of---on the paper.
Based on your post Ken I ordered a 10 sheet sample pack from IT Supplies which came today. I've run my standard test print on it along with four B&W images I printed on the other two metallic candidates. You're absolutely right: this paper is glittery. It's just plain weird. It's like someone put a layer of silver glitter underneath the printable surface, almost like what kids would use for an art project. It doesn't look like the Kodak paper at all
I can't say I care for it much!
Neil
-
Hi,
I've just received a package of the Photo Metallic (a buy prompted by LJ's current 30% sale price reduction) to test. Upon receipt I ran a couple of 16bit profiles for my ipf5000 and ipf6100 with my ColorMunki. Upon receiving marginal print results from the ipf5000 and completely unacceptable print results from the ipf6100 using those profiles, I fwas brought to this interesting thread.
The good news is LexJet has now a profile for the ipf6100 for the Canon plug-in and it performs satisfactorily... so they have obviously changed their tune about profiling the material.
-
I just printed targets on a Canon 9100 and had a profile made for the Lexjet Metalic and it seems to work well. For the driver.
Happy to share.
Cheers
don