I must have gotten a yellow batch. I sure didn't like it's base color compared to photo rag or Somerset Velvet either. Truman Paul Roark wrote: >Bob Michaels wrote: > > > >>... Critically comparing the HPR and EEM prints side by >>side, I simply can see no difference in the blacks, shadow detail or >>highlights. And, the base of the EEM is very slightly whiter than the >>HPR. ... >> >> > >Out of curiosity I pulled some test strips and measured the whites and >blacks with the X-Rite spectrophotometer. > >Whites: > > Photo Rag - C = 0.03, M = 0.04, Y = 0.03, Visual = 0.04; > > EAM - C = 0.04, M = 0.04, Y = 0.02, Visual = 0.04. > >So, for these batches of paper, the visual brightness is equal, the EAM is >slightly blue, and the PhotoRag is slightly magenta. The PR readings were >the same from two separate batches. The EEM/EAM has been fairly stable >recently, but did go through a period when it was distinctly yellower. > >With respect to the blacks/dmax, PhotoRag has generally had about the best >that could be achieved by the FS/VM black ink. It generally read about >1.72. On the old EAM, the FS/VM dmax would be about 1.65. With the new >EAM/EEM, however, the FS/VM dmax has fallen to 1.60 or below, depending on >printer. > >For most images, I find that as long as I get a dmax of about 1.65 on matte >paper, it looks jet black. In fact, except with ideal lighting, a matte >print dmax of 1.65 usually looks better side-by-side than a glossier print >with a 2.0+ dmax. The reflections on even semi-gloss blacks eliminates >their advantages. Of course, glass eliminates much of the advantage of the >matte paper. > >Also, the new EAM/EEM seems to hold the high-load blacks better than >PhotoRag. As such, for example, the new MIS matte black hits 1.69 on EEM >with the 7500 and only 1.67 with PhotoRag. > >(Note that EEM appears to be sold as EAM outside the U.S. and inside the >U.S. by outfits doing gray market. They appear to be the same paper.) > >Paul >http://www.PaulRoark.com > > > >Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at: > >http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint > >If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same page. > >Please follow these basic guidelines: >- Include your full name with your message. >- Include the address of your website, if you have one. >- As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep them short. >- As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header. >- Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or "flames." >- Complete your Yahoo profile. >- Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various resources on the homepage. > > > > >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Message
Re: [Digital BW] HWM v. EEM v. HPR, was: HWM rated more archival than EAM/EEM !?
2003-02-23 by Truman Prevatt
Attachments
- No local attachments were found for this message.