Paul, I posted a message about a month ago on new EAM being warmer. The paper I bought was also from Atlex, 8.5 x 11, Lot No. 02CC2004M. I found the same Lot No. at the local CompUSA, equally warm. And yes, it has weeker blacks. What size did you order? I have not contacted Epson yet, but perhaps we should. I am not sure if this is a manufacturing anomaly, or if they have a new paper/coating. Honestly, this is really bad because EAM is THE inexpensive steady war-horse, or was until now. I have yet to find another inexpensive paper with the attributes of EAM. I hope Epson rectifies this situation. Shilesh --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "Paul Roark" <paul.roark@v...> wrote: > I recently took delivery on some new EAM from Atlex.com, and it seems to be > a slightly different coating than previous batches. The paper looks a bit > yellow, in fact, the X-Rite says it is just 0.01 density units darker. The > blacks are weak -- 1.61 v. 1.68 for the last batch -- and the profile is > different. I tweaked my 3000 curves to adjust to the new coating, but I'm > not happy with this batch of EAM. (It is still called "Archival" matte.) > The Dmax is about the same as Legion Photo Matte, and the paper looks yellow > and dull in comparison. > > Has anyone who has noticed this difference contacted Epson about it? > Frankly, I want the old coating. This new batch of paper I received just is > not as good. > > I also took delivery of a MediaStreet.com package of their Royal Renaissance > (189), which they claim is PhotoRag. It is packaged incorrectly. The side > marked "Print this side" is the back of the paper. Use the "tongue" or > "lips" test. The sticky side is the coated side. > > I had not used Royal Renaissance of PhotoRag 189 before. I find it is very > sensitive to the pizza wheels of the 3000 -- the most affected paper I've > used. Have others noticed the problem of surface blemished caused by the > printer's wheels? > > Paul > http://www.PaulRoark.com
Message
Re: New EAM & MediaStreet Royal Renaissance (PhotoRag)
2002-09-29 by Shilesh Jani
Attachments
- No local attachments were found for this message.