Getting More out of a Paper

[fike]

I have been in search of a medium to light-weight double-sided inkjet paper that I can use for book arts (handmade books).  My main paper for fine art printing is Ilford GFS and, like many here, I like its sharpness and deep contrasty blacks.  Unfortunately, I can't find anything that even comes close in a semigloss double sided paper.  Recently I tried the Zeppelin paper from Red River.  I like the finish reasonably well, the color gamut seems good, and it's weight is appropriate for book arts.  Unfortunately, after profiling with my colormunki, it really pales in comparison to the IGFS.  I think the biggest problem is the depth of the blacks. I could probably simulate some of the sharpness and contrastiness of the Ilford with a different print sharpening routine that perhaps focuses more on local contrast enhancement.  What I can't easily do with preprocessing is change the depth of the black that the paper will return.

Are there any tricks I can try to get deeper blacks?  Will laying down more ink help?  Are there adjustments to the paper profile that I can make?  Will the dreaded "black point compensation" make any difference.  I am currently using perceptual intent.  Would relative colorometric change.  I know that I need to do bunches of experimentation, but I am looking for some suggestions. Particularly since I only have one more side of the piece of paper from the sample pack I got.  I don't know if I want to buy another pack of paper.

thanks,
fike

[fetish]

i think you'll have to do a few more tests on that paper if you're really interested in it.
have you tried the canned profiles on it? i only resort to making my own profiles IF the canned profiles are crap, because most of the time the canned profiles are quite spot on. as disccused here

[BarbaraArmstrong]

For an example of how Relative Colorimetric can yield more depth in your blacks, compared with Perceptual, look here: http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/color-space-conversion.htm.  Of course, this will only come into play when you have some out-of-gamut colors in your file, and the example shown may only be noticeable in some cases.  Another article I read on rendering intents indicated that Relative Colorimetric renders a "brighter" image.  This in turn could give the impression of greater depth in blacks.  I must say I don't play around with the rendering intent.  I always use Relative Colorimetric with Black Point Compensation, add 10 percent to the ink laydown, and add 10 (whatever it is, hundredths of a second?) to the drying pass for the printhead to allow for the additional ink.  I don't know if the additional time is needed, but I figure it won't hurt.  And I like the results, but I know I'm not the most experienced printer on this forum, so I'll be interested in seeing what other responses you get. --Barbara

[fike]

I've never seen enhanced results with blackpoint compensation.  I stopped experimenting with it.  I have stuck with perceptual and I forget why I made that choice.  I haven't gone back to reevaluate that choice. 

I have frequently found a need to slow down the printing to reduce smudging of heavy ink laydown, particularly when I am printing a black frame border on a print destined for foamcore mounting. 

What do you think you get out of increasing the ink laydown? I haven't experimented much with it.

I should see what the canned profiles give me.  I haven't generally found a big difference between them. I have been using some oddball papers lately, and it has become a habit to make my own profiles. I like the idea of manipulating the profiles and config to get more out the paper. I will probably continue experimenting. 

[BarbaraArmstrong]

I started increasing the ink lay-down when I (years ago) started using the new baryta papers and wanted to replicate a print I liked and had done on Hahnemuhle Photo Rag.  I was surprised to see the mutedness of the print with the photo-black ink.  To get the richness of the blacks that I had in the Photo Rag (310gsm) print, I had to increase ink lay-down by 13 percent.  Maybe something was off with my ICC profiles; I have not gone the custom profile route.  I was using the manufacturers' profiles, and printing on an Epson 2200.  Another part of my tendency to increase the ink lay-down (and this is totally unscientific; I haven't done side-by-side comparisons) is that I have always found it a little weird that (some) people "brag" about how little ink their printer uses.  Somehow, this is regarded as a plus.  Obviously, it saves money.  Yet, in any other fine art work, more medium on the substrate is usually preferable to less.  Can you imagine a painter using oils bragging about how little paint he has put down on the canvas?  So, as long as I am pleased with the rendition of detail in my prints, and the other aspects of the resulting print,  I think putting down some additional ink is a good thing.  It just seems to me that it can't hurt (and should likely help) longevity.  I like putting archival pigmented inks on archival really nice quality paper.  So, when you ask about what I get from putting down more ink, that's about it.  --Barbara

[texshooter]

I would
1. Experiment with more papers. There are a limited varieties of duo papers, so it shouldn't be that time consuming.
2. Switch to advanced black white mode on Epson printers.
3. Try boosting ink lay down
4. Use a varnish to give wet look

I haven't tried this yet, but seems to make sense

[LenR]

I can't explain why exactly but when I started limiting my inks in the profile instead of the rip they got much more pleasing. 

[fike]

that's interesting.  I will mess with it a bit. I have trouble thinking that at some point you wouldn't start blurring the sharpness.  That could be a pleasing effect, but I prefer to do my creative work in photoshop instead of with trial and error prints. 

[fike]

I'm not using black and white. I am printing color.

I will play with increasing the ink lay down. Another thing that I am concerned with here is with the lighter papers, they can saturate and wrinkle when they get too wet.

Varnish certainly works, but it is very time consuming for a 100 page book.  I have done some work with the various coatings and getting it thick enough and even enough to look good takes a substantial investment in time and care.  It's also messy. 

[Ernst Dinkla]

Recently I tried the Zeppelin paper from Red River.  I like the finish reasonably well, the color gamut seems good, and it's weight is appropriate for book arts.  Unfortunately, after profiling with my colormunki, it really pales in comparison to the IGFS.  I think the biggest problem is the depth of the blacks. I could probably simulate some of the sharpness and contrastiness of the Ilford with a different print sharpening routine that perhaps focuses more on local contrast enhancement.  What I can't easily do with preprocessing is change the depth of the black that the paper will return.

Are there any tricks I can try to get deeper blacks?  Will laying down more ink help?  Are there adjustments to the paper profile that I can make?  Will the dreaded "black point compensation" make any difference.  I am currently using perceptual intent.  Would relative colorometric change.  I know that I need to do bunches of experimentation, but I am looking for some suggestions. Particularly since I only have one more side of the piece of paper from the sample pack I got.  I don't know if I want to buy another pack of paper.

thanks,
fike

The Zeppelin does not build a big gamut or high Dmax with pigment inks (HP Vivera) in my experience. I think it is a paper for dye inks in the first place. Giving it more pigment ink will not change the gamut or Dmax here and it will create other issues if done in duplex for books. BPC On or Off with Perceptual Rendering does not change anything, it can make a difference with Relative Colormetric but will not help in this case. The Tecco EFI Proof 9155 Duo Semi-Matte is the same paper in my opinion, there will be a profile at Tecco's site but I doubt it improves your results.


met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst

330+ paper white spectral plots including the Canon US catalog:

http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm

[Alan Goldhammer]

Because you are printing on both sides of the paper, laying down too much ink might be a problem with swelling and you would really have to make sure that it's completely dry before printing on the second side.  I just looked up the specifications for this paper on the Red River website and there was a cautionary note about using it with pigment printers.  You should also print a standard test image to see what the potential problems with the paper are.  This ONE is especially good since it has a black patch in the upper corner and you can read the Dmax using your ColorMunki.  I don't think you are going to see Dmax change all that much with increase ink load as it's more a function of the paper coating and whether it has OBAs in it (I believe that this one does).

[Alan Goldhammer]

The Zeppelin does not build a big gamut or high Dmax with pigment inks (HP Vivera) in my experience. I think it is a paper for dye inks in the first place. Giving it more pigment ink will not change the gamut or Dmax here and it will create other issues if done in duplex for books. BPC On or Off with Perceptual Rendering does not change anything, it can make a difference with Relative Colormetric but will not help in this case. The Tecco EFI Proof 9155 Duo Semi-Matte is the same paper in my opinion, there will be a profile at Tecco's site but I doubt it improves your results.


met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst

330+ paper white spectral plots including the Canon US catalog:

http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm

Ernst,

The only other paper that I'm aware of that might be a possibility is the Ilford Galerie Smooth Luster Duo.  I didn't find it in your data base but it may be similar to the other one you mentioned.  The website says it's compatible with dye and pigment inks but that doesn't mean much without test results.

[fike]

Because you are printing on both sides of the paper, laying down too much ink might be a problem with swelling and you would really have to make sure that it's completely dry before printing on the second side.  I just looked up the specifications for this paper on the Red River website and there was a cautionary note about using it with pigment printers.  You should also print a standard test image to see what the potential problems with the paper are.  This ONE is especially good since it has a black patch in the upper corner and you can read the Dmax using your ColorMunki.  I don't think you are going to see Dmax change all that much with increase ink load as it's more a function of the paper coating and whether it has OBAs in it (I believe that this one does).

thanks for the feedback. I have a standard print that I made myself. I have a fairly large book full of printed samples on a variety of papers.  It exercises the image to my tastes...and believe me..I can see the difference in black. I hadn't thought of measuring Dmax with the colormunki...it would confirm what I can easily see though.  Yep, double-sided printing with heavy ink is likely to be problematic.  I have a sample of their arctic polar luster and Polar Matte, both double sided that I'll try. The problem for book arts is getting a heavy paper to fold neatly and to be able to get the grain of the paper running the way you need it for the lay of the book.  These attributes need to be weighed against the image quality.  Trust me, Ilford GFS is not easy to bind in a book.

[Ernst Dinkla]

I started increasing the ink lay-down when I (years ago) started using the new baryta papers and wanted to replicate a print I liked and had done on Hahnemuhle Photo Rag.  I was surprised to see the mutedness of the print with the photo-black ink.  To get the richness of the blacks that I had in the Photo Rag (310gsm) print, I had to increase ink lay-down by 13 percent.  Maybe something was off with my ICC profiles; I have not gone the custom profile route.  I was using the manufacturers' profiles, and printing on an Epson 2200.  Another part of my tendency to increase the ink lay-down (and this is totally unscientific; I haven't done side-by-side comparisons) is that I have always found it a little weird that (some) people "brag" about how little ink their printer uses.  Somehow, this is regarded as a plus.  Obviously, it saves money.  Yet, in any other fine art work, more medium on the substrate is usually preferable to less.  Can you imagine a painter using oils bragging about how little paint he has put down on the canvas?  So, as long as I am pleased with the rendition of detail in my prints, and the other aspects of the resulting print,  I think putting down some additional ink is a good thing.  It just seems to me that it can't hurt (and should likely help) longevity.  I like putting archival pigmented inks on archival really nice quality paper.  So, when you ask about what I get from putting down more ink, that's about it.  --Barbara

With a RIP and good control on ink limits someone creating CMYK+++ profiles will measure the maximum chroma on the color ink steps and the Dmax on the black steps and set ink limits accordingly. If detail gets lost before reaching the best chroma or Dmax a compromise on ink limits and UCR will be made. After that a profile can be created. The best matte inkjet paper coatings can usually absorb more ink than the best gloss inkjet paper coatings. Thinner coatings like the Zeppelin has can not stand higher loads and do not improve their gamut that way. The paper does not have a true polyethylene RC barrier either so the base warps when too much ink is applied.

Gamut and Dmax of the best gloss inkjet papers are considered (and measured) to be better than gamut and Dmax on the best matte inkjet papers. With less ink used on the gloss papers. If inkjet printing has to be compared with fine art media then watercolor painting may be the closest to the effects created, more opaque paints do not obey to the same laws.


met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst

330+ paper white spectral plots including the Canon US catalog:

http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm

[texshooter]

Regarding the problem of paper not bending for book arts, I decided the quality of the image is more important that the quality of bookbinding. So I opted to print on photo black fiber paper instead of matte. And I decided to give up the double sided paper idea. I hole punch the paper (admittedly sacriligious) and insert in a leather 3-ring binder.  Not my dream photo book, but the best compromise.

Whatever you do, no more plastic sleeves....ever!

[fike]

Regarding the problem of paper not bending for book arts, I decided the quality of the image is more important that the quality of bookbinding. So I opted to print on photo black fiber paper instead of matte. And I decided to give up the double sided paper idea. I hole punch the paper (admittedly sacriligious) and insert in a leather 3-ring binder.  Not my dream photo book, but the best compromise.

Whatever you do, no more plastic sleeves....ever!

Yes, I am afraid that IS sacrilegious to me.  There will of course need to be a compromise, but I am hoping to get a bit more out of it than I am currently able to get.

[texshooter]

I actually prefer the look of hole punched margins over those hindge adhesive strips. I do 11x17. Landscape.
Plus using single side paper turned out to be a blessing because it gave me the idea of sticking a label on the back of the adjacent page. On the label is typed a short narrative of the photo.
So instead of having two images per sheet, you have one image with a story. Makes the experience interesting. It helps one focus on one photo at a time.  Plus youre not limited by paper choice.

[fike]

No hinge adhesive strips here. we are hand-stitching a bound book with leather embossed covers.

I was looking back into my collection of samples and found an old sample I printed on Moab Kayenta.  WOW! That matte paper really looks great.  Excellent blacks and sharpness.  It even folds adequately well--no crunchy cracking that many of the ceramic coated papers have (entrada, for example).

[Ernst Dinkla]

With leather embossed covers you might consider a paper that has at least cotton content and keeps its white preserved in time. Red River does have a quality duplex paper; the Aurora Natural, 100% cotton, 230 gsm (my measurement). If they can tell you what the paper fiber direction is you should be able to find an economic sheet size in their catalog. Cheapest inkjet cotton paper by weight, duplex coating, good Aardenburg test.


met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst

330+ paper white spectral plots including the Canon US catalog:

http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm

[fike]

I have some of the aurora in the pipeline waiting to be tested. I will report back my findings.

On another vector...I wonder what it would be like to get an Epson R1900 with GLOP and make profiles for matte paper with it using the GLOP.  I wonder if that would bridge the gap between needing matte rag papers for book arts yet wanting higher Dmax.  On a side note, I hate using all the print sprays.  They are nasty and toxic and I don't have the facilities to prevent them from smelling up my house.