I have used Hahnemuhle textured papers for like 16 years and not only find them consistent but actually nicer that those textured Canson media you mentioned.
I did use the Canson Edition Etching because of the pigment whiteners made it a bit brighter but Hahnemühle Museum Etching is a great human looking texture with excellent overall characteristics overall and does not scuff like the German Etching can. Though both are great papers.
The media I have always used for the heavy texture is Hahnemuhle William Turner . It may be the single most beautiful inkjet media I've ever used and unlike the Canson highly textured but doesn't look like it was run through a texture machine. The downside to William Turner is its vulnerability to scuffing when a lot of black is laid down. I spray it.
My recent experience with the Canson Rag Photographique and Platine is that they have not changed, except for a mottling in the pure black areas in some batches on Rag Photographique and the Epson variety Legacy Fiber as well. I haven't tried the Edition Etching since the company transition so can't comment on that. A lot of people like the Moab Entrada. I haven't tried it for many years. The early versions flaked badly but that seems to have been fixed.
John
quote author=bellevuefineart link=topic=118824.msg1000855#msg1000855 date=1506020855]
Indeed, we were just hit with the paper changes as Canson was purchased by the FILA group. The papers are no longer the same at all. There is a small round grey QC stickers on the new boxes. The paper is only the same by name. The paper itself is completely different, and shouldn't even be called the same thing. We noticed right away.
At Bellevue Fine Art we use the Canson Velin and the Canson Aquarelle a LOT. But with these changes we're looking for a replacement for both papers.
First, the Canson Velin is visibly warmer now than it was. We immediately noticed when running a large job and we changed paper rolls in the middle of the job. Not the same paper at all. Not only is it warmer, but the texture is visibly different. The new Canson Velin has more texture. It's like the Crane Museo as if it was flattened out more, but it's got that same weird machine made slight texture. The new Velin is also more curly and the prints don't flatten out as well if you use rolls. And lastly, the makeup of the paper itself is different, and our 9900's have a hard time cutting it. We've had our printers give us cut errors numerous times in the first week of use.
As for the Canson Aquarelle, which was our standard watercolor paper for a long time, it's not at all the same as before. The texture is very different, and not at all appealing. We're looking for a replacement. Previously to this we used the Magiclee Arches Infinity and were happy with it. Then due to availability we switched to the Canson Aquarelle adn liked it a lot. Good consistent color and great texture. When reproducing watercolor paintings it was great. But now we have this thing that looks and acts like Crane Museo, which we also used to use, but it had massive cutting issues and was very very curly and wouldn't flatten well.
What the FILA group has done to the Canson branded papers is a travesty. They were good papers, but now they're just not interesting at all. The sudden change is causing confusion, and the quality and feel of the papers has degraded.
Anybody have suggestions for similar papers?
PS - who is the genius at Luminous Landscapes that wants me to answer THREE questions to post this, including the square root of 81 AND 7x8+10 divided by 3?
![Huh ???](https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/Smileys/default/huh.gif)
?? REALLY? Because if every time I want to post, if I have to answer math questions like that then this forum is not going to be in my list of places to go.
[/quote]