Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Printing: Printers, Papers and Inks => Topic started by: Photolandscape on July 11, 2007, 11:57:36 am
-
I would like to find an alternative to Epson Premium Luster (EPL). Although EPL has served me well, I would prefer a non-resin coated paper--something archival, and perhaps something with a little less texture in the finish. What I like about EPL is the color hold-out and saturation. Any ideas would be appreciated.
-
Are you using sheets or rolls? I think the roll version ("250") is a bit different from the sheet version, having one less coating and a bit less orange peel in the texture. InkJetArt's MC Luster (http://www.inkjetart.com/photo_papers/ceramic/index.html) is virtually identical to the 250 version of Epson Luster and has long been my standard paper. You might want to give it a try. (It also comes in a more useful 17" roll width, vs. Epson's goofy 16" width.)
Nill
~~
www.toulme.net (http://www.toulme.net)
-
InkJetArt's MC Luster (http://www.inkjetart.com/photo_papers/ceramic/index.html) is virtually identical to the 250 version of Epson Luster and has long been my standard paper.
I believe that paper is an RC based paper as well.
As far as something "more" archival, I'm pretty sure that despite the "resin coated" backing, Epson Premium Lustre is rated quite well ... not sure how archival you want it.
Resin Coated paper is a very old technology, being used in silver halide photo papers for many decades. I'm not sure if the ink is still the limiting archival factor and not the paper, even with RC papers.
However, some quick internet research didn't yield much information. I can find plenty of info on the rating of K3 inks, but not really on different papers.
This has tweaked my curiosity though, so I intend on looking into further. Hopefully someone with more expertise can post some links on paper archival studies.
-
I would like to find an alternative to Epson Premium Luster (EPL). Although EPL has served me well, I would prefer a non-resin coated paper--something archival, and perhaps something with a little less texture in the finish. What I like about EPL is the color hold-out and saturation. Any ideas would be appreciated.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=127600\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Have you considered:
Crane Museo Silver Rag
Hahnemuhle Fine Art Pearl
Hahnemuhle PhotoRag Pearl
Innova FibaPrint
-
I like Kodak Professional Lustre better than Epson's Lustre paper on the Epson 9800...
Kodak profiles are good and the paper does not scratch as easily as the Epson finish....
-
Have you tried Ilford Smooth Pearl?
Profiles are available: www.ilford.com/galerie
-
I like Kodak Professional Lustre better than Epson's Lustre paper on the Epson 9800...
Kodak profiles are good and the paper does not scratch as easily as the Epson finish....
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=127726\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I also prefer the Kodak Papers ...
-
I use the Hahnemuhle Photo Rag Pearl and love it. I has such a velvety warmth. Not the brightest paper out there, of course, or the greatest d-max, but I don't care about those things as much as I care about archival characteristics and overall look of the paper. The tooth on this paper is quite subtle, also.
-
Two other papers to consider, both by Hahnemuehle:
Fine Art Pearl - A very nice, substantial fiber (read: non-rag) based paper with a lovely, very subtle smooth pearl finish. The pearl finish is much more subtle than the Ilford Smooth Pearl, IMHO. The FAP also does not have the platicky/RC feel of the Ilford. The DMAX on this paper is outstanding and the color rendition is excellent. It is fairly bright white (105, if I recall correctly) - quite a bit more so than the H's Photo Rag Pearl, which has a slightly warm tone to it - but, unlike the Photo Rag Pearl, has optical whiteners which can potentially reduce its archival quality. (The assumption so far, among most, is that the whiteners being used by H in its fine art papers are in the paper, rather than the coating and are sufficiently well buffered that diminished brightness and/or yellowing should be minimal over time and should not effect overall print life substantially. But, only time or the Wilhelm Institute will tell.)
Another paper that I have just tried and absolutely love is H's Photo Rag Satin. This is an all rag paper, but does have some whiteners in it. The cool thing about the paper is it appears matte when unprinted, but after printing the printed areas carry of lovely, very subtle satin sheen to them, while the unprinted areas remain matte. This effect, with the right picture, is absolutely stunning! I printed a shot I took of some sea dunes with sea oats growing in them and a fairly dramatic sky behind them and the impact imparted by the print on this paper was far, far greater than a print of the same shot using the Ilford Smooth Pearl. It was night and day.
You can get a sampler pack of 2 sheets each of 9 different Hahnemuehle papers, including both the Fine Art Peal and the Photo Rag Satin (but unfortunately not the Photo Rag Pearl) from Adorama (or other online shops) for about $18. Definitely a nice investment if you want to check out some of H's excellent papers without springing for a whole box.
-
Try Innova Ultrasmooth Glossy 285, which is right between Luster & Glossy, & looks a lot lile the old Kodak Polycontrast F fiber-based paper. Also Innova F-type Glossy Warm, for no OBs.
Kirk
-
The whole question of whether the paper, rather than the ink, can be considered archival seems to me to be a thorny one. Wilhelm's site concentrates on specific ink/paper combinations, quite reasonably, but there is very little information there about paper specifically.
For the past 18 months I have been running some simple home-brewed tests of papers and inkjet inks by placing samples against a single-glazed window in my house. They are stood-off the glass by about 1/8 inch, and have a black card strip over part of the image. They get about 6 to 7 hours of direct sun per day (when there is any sun) and are subjected to quite wild extremes of temperature and humidity. This is far from scientific, I know, but they are all in same environment so we can make some direct comparisons.
One of the interesting results so far is that several of the so-called "archival" fibre-based papers in fact go yellow at a scary rate when subjected to this treatment. Whereas, surprise surprise, two that do not turn yellow are the RC-base HP Premium Plus and Epson Premium Glossy, both of which would probably be rejected by fine-art printers.
John
-
According to WIR, Premium Glossy doesn't contain brighteners. Maybe this is why it doesn't go yellow so quickly ...