Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Hahnemuhle Photo Gloss Baryta vs. FineArt Barta?  (Read 821 times)

mshea

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 162
Hahnemuhle Photo Gloss Baryta vs. FineArt Barta?
« on: November 06, 2018, 04:35:49 PM »

I've used up the last of my Harman by Hahnemuhle Gloss Baryta. I understand it's been replaced with Hahnemuhle Photo Gloss Baryta. I had ordered a roll of the latter, but was sent a roll of FineArt Baryta by mistake. I haven't opened it yet and was wondering what the differences are between the Photo Gloss and the FineArt. I can't find anything on the Hahnemuhle site that gives a side-by-side comparison of the two (surface texture, etc.). Can anyone help me out?

Also, is there much of a difference between the old Harman/Hahn Gloss Baryta and the new Hahnemuhle Photo Gloss Baryta?

Too bad they don't offer the 17 X 25 cut sheets anymore!

Thanks,
Merrill
Logged

howardm

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1865
Re: Hahnemuhle Photo Gloss Baryta vs. FineArt Barta?
« Reply #1 on: November 07, 2018, 09:04:14 AM »

Don't take this as any gospel but *likely*, the FAB has a somewhat lower gloss than the PG (like slightly!!!! textured vs the much smoother PG).

If you're near Boston, MA, I have  box of 17x25 I probably will never use.

texshooter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 479
Re: Hahnemuhle Photo Gloss Baryta vs. FineArt Barta?
« Reply #2 on: November 08, 2018, 02:34:46 AM »



According to this

Hahnemuhle Fine Art Baryta
Feels like a matte fine art paper.
Heavy 325 gsm weight
Back of the print is roughly textured.
Unique surface texture that eliminates all gloss differential.
Bright neutral whites.
Deep rich blacks and wide tonal range.
Below average in sharpness.
Has optical brighteners..

Harman Gloss Baryta
As smooth and glossy as RC paper.
No gloss differential.
Paper tone is white but not as white as Epson Exhibition Fiber.
Back of print is smooth.
Rich blacks and detailed highlights.
Excellent sharpness but slightly less sharp than Canson Infinity Baryta Photographique.
Heavy 320 gsm weight.
Has optical brighteners.

The Harman Gloss Baryta was discontinued and replaced with Hahnemuhle Photo Gloss Baryta. The former had OBAs, the latter does not. here.  I assume they look and feel the same.


Logged

MHMG

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1138
Re: Hahnemuhle Photo Gloss Baryta vs. FineArt Barta?
« Reply #3 on: November 08, 2018, 10:16:01 AM »



Harman Gloss Baryta

The Harman Gloss Baryta was discontinued and replaced with Hahnemuhle Photo Gloss Baryta. The former had OBAs, the latter does not. here.  I assume they look and feel the same.

Hahnemuhle's newer version called Gloss Baryta 320 does indeed contain a medium amount of OBAs (I checked a sample sheet obtained recently at the 2018 Photo Plus East show, and Hahnemuhle's data sheet also notes "yes" in it's OBA description). A lower amount of OBA than the Fine Art Baryta, but still enough to be concerned about if "archival" pigment printing is your goal.

Another paper in this category to consider would be Innova Exhibition Photo Paper. It has a true 100% gelatin-baryta whitening layer (no TiO2 mixed in) and this baryta layer gets polished super smooth under pressure rolls during the manufacturing operation like traditional wet process gelatin papers used to be, then the ink receptor top coat added. The final image surface is ultra smooth but a lower gloss than most other media in this category, ie., a lovely classical "air-dried F surface" finish, IMHO. Also, the OBAs are in the paper core only, so hidden below the coating layers. It therefore has an OBA "low" rating using the Aardenburg testing criteria. I haven't run a formal light fade test on it yet, but my guess is it will outperform the Hahnemuhle papers cited above with any of the major OEM pigmented ink sets simply because of the lower concentration and location of the OBAs and no TiO2 to adversely affect yellowing of the OBAs over time.

cheers,
Mark
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com

Logged

mshea

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 162
Re: Hahnemuhle Photo Gloss Baryta vs. FineArt Barta?
« Reply #4 on: November 08, 2018, 10:40:56 AM »

Don't take this as any gospel but *likely*, the FAB has a somewhat lower gloss than the PG (like slightly!!!! textured vs the much smoother PG).

If you're near Boston, MA, I have  box of 17x25 I probably will never use.

Yes, I am. Sent you a PM.

Merrill
Logged

texshooter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 479
Re: Hahnemuhle Photo Gloss Baryta vs. FineArt Barta?
« Reply #5 on: November 08, 2018, 11:43:27 AM »



Another paper in this category to consider would be Innova Exhibition Photo Paper. It has a true 100% gelatin-baryta whitening layer (no TiO2 mixed in) and this baryta layer gets polished super smooth under pressure rolls during the manufacturing operation like traditional wet process gelatin papers used to be, then the ink receptor top coat added. The final image surface is ultra smooth but a lower gloss than most other media in this category, ie., a lovely classical "air-dried F surface" finish, IMHO. Also, the OBAs are in the paper core only, so hidden below the coating layers. It therefore has an OBA "low" rating using the Aardenburg testing criteria. I haven't run a formal light fade test on it yet, but my guess is it will outperform the Hahnemuhle papers cited above with any of the major OEM pigmented ink sets simply because of the lower concentration and location of the OBAs and no TiO2 to adversely affect yellowing of the OBAs over time.


Moab's new Juniper Baryta Rag looks like it may be a contender.  It has no OBAs.  I have yet to try it so am curious how it compares to the others.

https://www.moabpaper.com/juniper-baryta-rag/
« Last Edit: November 08, 2018, 11:52:25 AM by texshooter »
Logged

stockjock

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 202
Re: Hahnemuhle Photo Gloss Baryta vs. FineArt Barta?
« Reply #6 on: November 08, 2018, 03:46:46 PM »

Hahnemuhle's newer version called Gloss Baryta 320 does indeed contain a medium amount of OBAs (I checked a sample sheet obtained recently at the 2018 Photo Plus East show, and Hahnemuhle's data sheet also notes "yes" in it's OBA description). A lower amount of OBA than the Fine Art Baryta, but still enough to be concerned about if "archival" pigment printing is your goal.

Another paper in this category to consider would be Innova Exhibition Photo Paper. It has a true 100% gelatin-baryta whitening layer (no TiO2 mixed in) and this baryta layer gets polished super smooth under pressure rolls during the manufacturing operation like traditional wet process gelatin papers used to be, then the ink receptor top coat added. The final image surface is ultra smooth but a lower gloss than most other media in this category, ie., a lovely classical "air-dried F surface" finish, IMHO. Also, the OBAs are in the paper core only, so hidden below the coating layers. It therefore has an OBA "low" rating using the Aardenburg testing criteria. I haven't run a formal light fade test on it yet, but my guess is it will outperform the Hahnemuhle papers cited above with any of the major OEM pigmented ink sets simply because of the lower concentration and location of the OBAs and no TiO2 to adversely affect yellowing of the OBAs over time.

cheers,
Mark
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com

That Innova Exhibition Photo Baryta sounds like a lovely paper.  Have you had enough experience with it to know how the surface does with durability and issues like flaking that were problems with the old Harman Gloss Baryta which sounds similar?
Logged

Ryan Mack

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 121
    • Ryan Mack on Facebook
Boston area ink-on-paper meetup?
« Reply #7 on: November 09, 2018, 07:40:23 AM »

Hey taking this thread off on a bit of an tangent but as another Boston area photo printing enthusiast (and who happens to use the same paper), Iím wondering if we should get a group together sometime. Are all of you members of BCC?
Logged

howardm

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1865
Re: Hahnemuhle Photo Gloss Baryta vs. FineArt Barta?
« Reply #8 on: November 09, 2018, 08:12:27 AM »

pls start another thread but that said, I'm in MetroWest (Concord/Acton) so I don't tend to do clubs that
are 'in town' or so due to traffic.

mearussi

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 291
Re: Hahnemuhle Photo Gloss Baryta vs. FineArt Barta?
« Reply #9 on: November 09, 2018, 09:35:05 AM »

I quit using Baryta because of how easily the surface scratched. But Canson's new Baryta Prestige has a slightly textured surface that resists both scratching and fingerprints. It's also less reflective making it easier to see. It has also produced the most dimensional looking prints I've had from any paper on my 7800 making it my favorite (until I find something better). 
Logged

texshooter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 479
Re: Hahnemuhle Photo Gloss Baryta vs. FineArt Barta?
« Reply #10 on: November 09, 2018, 12:00:26 PM »

I quit using Baryta because of how easily the surface scratched. But Canson's new Baryta Prestige has a slightly textured surface that resists both scratching and fingerprints. It's also less reflective making it easier to see. It has also produced the most dimensional looking prints I've had from any paper on my 7800 making it my favorite (until I find something better).

Does the Canson Baryta Prestige replace the Canson Baryta Photographique?   So many papers, so little time.
Logged

faberryman

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 157
Re: Hahnemuhle Photo Gloss Baryta vs. FineArt Barta?
« Reply #11 on: November 09, 2018, 12:07:10 PM »

Does the Canson Baryta Prestige replace the Canson Baryta Photographique?   So many papers, so little time.
I don't think so. Both are listed at B&H. Prestige is 30% more expensive. I prefer Photographique. Closest I've see the air dried glossy fiber based. I don't like the texture of luster, pearl, etc.
Logged

howardm

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1865
Re: Hahnemuhle Photo Gloss Baryta vs. FineArt Barta?
« Reply #12 on: November 09, 2018, 03:57:34 PM »

That's a lot of Prestige premium.  I priced out the 13x19 and I think it was 40% or something.

mearussi

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 291
Re: Hahnemuhle Photo Gloss Baryta vs. FineArt Barta?
« Reply #13 on: November 09, 2018, 11:15:47 PM »

Does the Canson Baryta Prestige replace the Canson Baryta Photographique?   So many papers, so little time.
They both still exist.

That's why frequenting forums like this is beneficial, it can save you a lot of time and money learning from other's experiences. I learned by just buying as many sample packs as I could and printing the same image on them to see the difference.
Logged

alain

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 438
Re: Hahnemuhle Photo Gloss Baryta vs. FineArt Barta?
« Reply #14 on: November 10, 2018, 09:32:28 AM »

Hahnemuhle's newer version called Gloss Baryta 320 does indeed contain a medium amount of OBAs (I checked a sample sheet obtained recently at the 2018 Photo Plus East show, and Hahnemuhle's data sheet also notes "yes" in it's OBA description). A lower amount of OBA than the Fine Art Baryta, but still enough to be concerned about if "archival" pigment printing is your goal.

Another paper in this category to consider would be Innova Exhibition Photo Paper. It has a true 100% gelatin-baryta whitening layer (no TiO2 mixed in) and this baryta layer gets polished super smooth under pressure rolls during the manufacturing operation like traditional wet process gelatin papers used to be, then the ink receptor top coat added. The final image surface is ultra smooth but a lower gloss than most other media in this category, ie., a lovely classical "air-dried F surface" finish, IMHO. Also, the OBAs are in the paper core only, so hidden below the coating layers. It therefore has an OBA "low" rating using the Aardenburg testing criteria. I haven't run a formal light fade test on it yet, but my guess is it will outperform the Hahnemuhle papers cited above with any of the major OEM pigmented ink sets simply because of the lower concentration and location of the OBAs and no TiO2 to adversely affect yellowing of the OBAs over time.

cheers,
Mark
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com

How does the " Innova Exhibition Photo Baryta" (if that's the paper you talk about) handle?  The "Hahnemuhle Photo Gloss Baryta" has a nasty curl, which makes printing a bit of a hassle.

Logged

Panagiotis

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 206
Re: Hahnemuhle Photo Gloss Baryta vs. FineArt Barta?
« Reply #15 on: November 10, 2018, 11:12:33 AM »

From close inspection a sample of Innova Exhibition Photo Baryta IFA-69 looks identical to a sample of Canson Baryta Photographique 310. SpectrumViz confirms this observation (the old name of IFA-69 was Innova Fibaprint Baryta 310):

 
Logged

MHMG

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1138
Re: Hahnemuhle Photo Gloss Baryta vs. FineArt Barta?
« Reply #16 on: November 10, 2018, 03:46:47 PM »

From close inspection a sample of Innova Exhibition Photo Baryta IFA-69 looks identical to a sample of Canson Baryta Photographique 310. SpectrumViz confirms this observation (the old name of IFA-69 was Innova Fibaprint Baryta 310):

 

Good catch. For all practical purposes Innova Exhibition Photo Baryta 310gsm = Ilford Gallerie Prestige Gold Fibre Silk 310gsm = Hahnemuhle Photo Silk Baryta 310gsm = Canson Infinity Baryta Photographique = FeLix Schoeller J23160 True Baryta 310gsm !!!  There may be others as well! 

Surface luster, thickness, gsm weight, printing characteristics, anti-curl back side coatings texture and thickness, spectral reflectance curves of front surface, spectral reflectance curves of backside coatings all identical! Shuffle some samples of all these papers together, and I don't believe anyone could pick one brand from the others.

My original expectations for Innova Exhibition Photo Baryta as being significantly different paper stems from a conversation I had with a knowledgeable representative at Innova. I asked specifically if Innova Exhibition Photo Baryta was free of titanium dioxide (TiO2) and he said he was certain it had none and that the paper was 100% Baryta.  However, I now wonder if that information is correct.

My concern is based on the fact that indeed, it sure acts and looks exactly like the other papers mentioned above. I have recent samples of all of those papers except the FS True Baryta in my studio today.  I also know from light fade tests that both Canson Baryta Photographique and Iflord Gold Fibre Silk suffer from light-induced low intensity staining/yellowing (LILIS). Hence, I do not recommend them where "archival pigment printing" is one of the printmaker's goals.  My hypothesis is that LILIS occurs when the product contains both stilbene-derived optical brighteners (OBAs) and Titanium dioxide (TiO2). I went so far as to test a sample of the original IGFS (pre Ilford bankruptcy) and a sample of the CiBP (circa 2010 sample) with a portable X-ray fluorescence (XRF) unit, and it detected both Barium Sulfate and TiO2 in those two papers, thus conforming to my hypothesis that TiO2 and OBAs do not play well together. The light exposed paper yellows more in dark storage or low illumination levels over time than can be demonstrated merely from loss of OBA fluorescence.

So, it's beginning to look like another round of examination with XRF and followed by light fade testing is in order for more recent samples of all the papers cited above :-\

BTW, there is still dealer confusion over the properties of IGFS, (for example at B&H photo). Product is variously claimed to be full cotton base and OBA-free. It is neither, and neither are any of the papers I just cited above.

cheers,
Mark
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com
« Last Edit: November 10, 2018, 04:04:01 PM by MHMG »
Logged

mearussi

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 291
Re: Hahnemuhle Photo Gloss Baryta vs. FineArt Barta?
« Reply #17 on: November 11, 2018, 01:36:08 AM »

Good catch. For all practical purposes Innova Exhibition Photo Baryta 310gsm = Ilford Gallerie Prestige Gold Fibre Silk 310gsm = Hahnemuhle Photo Silk Baryta 310gsm = Canson Infinity Baryta Photographique = FeLix Schoeller J23160 True Baryta 310gsm !!!  There may be others as well! 

Surface luster, thickness, gsm weight, printing characteristics, anti-curl back side coatings texture and thickness, spectral reflectance curves of front surface, spectral reflectance curves of backside coatings all identical! Shuffle some samples of all these papers together, and I don't believe anyone could pick one brand from the others.

My original expectations for Innova Exhibition Photo Baryta as being significantly different paper stems from a conversation I had with a knowledgeable representative at Innova. I asked specifically if Innova Exhibition Photo Baryta was free of titanium dioxide (TiO2) and he said he was certain it had none and that the paper was 100% Baryta.  However, I now wonder if that information is correct.

My concern is based on the fact that indeed, it sure acts and looks exactly like the other papers mentioned above. I have recent samples of all of those papers except the FS True Baryta in my studio today.  I also know from light fade tests that both Canson Baryta Photographique and Iflord Gold Fibre Silk suffer from light-induced low intensity staining/yellowing (LILIS). Hence, I do not recommend them where "archival pigment printing" is one of the printmaker's goals.  My hypothesis is that LILIS occurs when the product contains both stilbene-derived optical brighteners (OBAs) and Titanium dioxide (TiO2). I went so far as to test a sample of the original IGFS (pre Ilford bankruptcy) and a sample of the CiBP (circa 2010 sample) with a portable X-ray fluorescence (XRF) unit, and it detected both Barium Sulfate and TiO2 in those two papers, thus conforming to my hypothesis that TiO2 and OBAs do not play well together. The light exposed paper yellows more in dark storage or low illumination levels over time than can be demonstrated merely from loss of OBA fluorescence.

So, it's beginning to look like another round of examination with XRF and followed by light fade testing is in order for more recent samples of all the papers cited above :-\

BTW, there is still dealer confusion over the properties of IGFS, (for example at B&H photo). Product is variously claimed to be full cotton base and OBA-free. It is neither, and neither are any of the papers I just cited above.

cheers,
Mark
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com
I'm glad you're taking TiO2 into account now. With all the problems VC B&W papers had from the ozone TiO2 generated after the print was sealed in a glass frame (concentrating the ozone) it makes me wonder how much damage it can cause pigment inkjet prints. Any information you find out about which papers contain it would be appreciated.
Logged

Panagiotis

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 206
Re: Hahnemuhle Photo Gloss Baryta vs. FineArt Barta?
« Reply #18 on: November 11, 2018, 04:02:32 AM »

Good catch. For all practical purposes Innova Exhibition Photo Baryta 310gsm = Ilford Gallerie Prestige Gold Fibre Silk 310gsm = Hahnemuhle Photo Silk Baryta 310gsm = Canson Infinity Baryta Photographique = FeLix Schoeller J23160 True Baryta 310gsm !!!  There may be others as well! 

Surface luster, thickness, gsm weight, printing characteristics, anti-curl back side coatings texture and thickness, spectral reflectance curves of front surface, spectral reflectance curves of backside coatings all identical! Shuffle some samples of all these papers together, and I don't believe anyone could pick one brand from the others.

Another one is Olmec Photo Silk Fibre Baryta 310gsm OLM 69 (which is marketed by Innova so no surprise here).
I find interesting that the same paper (IFA-69) is treated by Innova as a premium paper (Editions range) and by Hahnemuhle as a paper which is in it's entry level range called "Hahnemuhle Photo" (the box states with big letters "For Everyday Printing").

My concern is based on the fact that indeed, it sure acts and looks exactly like the other papers mentioned above. I have recent samples of all of those papers except the FS True Baryta in my studio today.  I also know from light fade tests that both Canson Baryta Photographique and Iflord Gold Fibre Silk suffer from light-induced low intensity staining/yellowing (LILIS). Hence, I do not recommend them where "archival pigment printing" is one of the printmaker's goals.  My hypothesis is that LILIS occurs when the product contains both stilbene-derived optical brighteners (OBAs) and Titanium dioxide (TiO2). I went so far as to test a sample of the original IGFS (pre Ilford bankruptcy) and a sample of the CiBP (circa 2010 sample) with a portable X-ray fluorescence (XRF) unit, and it detected both Barium Sulfate and TiO2 in those two papers, thus conforming to my hypothesis that TiO2 and OBAs do not play well together. The light exposed paper yellows more in dark storage or low illumination levels over time than can be demonstrated merely from loss of OBA fluorescence.

So, it's beginning to look like another round of examination with XRF and followed by light fade testing is in order for more recent samples of all the papers cited above :-\

BTW, there is still dealer confusion over the properties of IGFS, (for example at B&H photo). Product is variously claimed to be full cotton base and OBA-free. It is neither, and neither are any of the papers I just cited above.

cheers,
Mark
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com

Useful information. Thank you.
Logged

alain

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 438
Re: Hahnemuhle Photo Gloss Baryta vs. FineArt Barta?
« Reply #19 on: November 11, 2018, 05:02:34 AM »

Another one is Olmec Photo Silk Fibre Baryta 310gsm OLM 69 (which is marketed by Innova so no surprise here).
I find interesting that the same paper (IFA-69) is treated by Innova as a premium paper (Editions range) and by Hahnemuhle as a paper which is in it's entry level range called "Hahnemuhle Photo" (the box states with big letters "For Everyday Printing").

Useful information. Thank you.
Well I've seen in 1 shop that the Hahnemuhle version is more expensive than the Innova version.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up