Digital BW, The Print

Hi Paul,

I am hoping that you or someone else can provide a comparison between 
EEM, Epson UltraSmooth Fine Art, and Epson Smooth Fine Art papers in 
smoothness, dMax, and print quality.  

I have a couple of unopened 48"x50' rolls of Epson Smooth Fine Art paper, 
which I will probably sell because I don't usually print that wide.  This would 
be especially likely if the UltraSmooth is a better paper.  I'm looking for a 
smooth, non-flaking, "archival" 100% rag paper to print with my Epson 10000 
pigment inks.  Up until now I have been printing mostly on Epson Premium 
Luster, which is a totally different beast than the softer looking prints I get 
from fine-art papers (I have been using EEM a bit).   Many thanks!

Tom Andrews
http://www.wildlandart.com


> >By EEM do you mean Epson Enhanced Matte (i.e. the old EAM?)
> 
> Yes, Epson Enhanced Matte (also sold as Epson Archival Matte outside the
> U.S.) has, in my view, a better image quality than UltraSmooth.
> 
> >Isn't that acidic as well as possible use of brighteners?
> 
> Yes.  It, like most papers, including traditional "archival" silver print
> paper, has brighteners that will cause it to yellow from extended light
> exposure about 0.03 units.  Then is stabilizes.  That may not cause any
> other negative effects on long-term storage.
> 
> EEM is also acidic.  This will cause problems for long-term storage.  It is
> probably also one reason the paper performs so well.  Buffering is cheap.
> Epson engineers appear to have avoided it for both economic and 
performance
> reasons.  I'm experimenting with post-printing deacidification, and the Wei
> T'o #12 spray appears to work.  It's in fade testing now.
> 
> I'm not suggesting museums will accept EEM/EAM equally, but I suspect a
> deacidified, buffered EEM will have a better image than UltraSmooth and 
will
> have a very long life, if not being "archival" -- whatever that means.
> 
> I don't see EEM's market shrinking much.  I think Eclipse and other cotton
> papers that flake and have other performance problems will be the papers
> that UltraSmooth replaces, especially if the UltraSmooth is priced below
> them.
> 
> Paul
> http://www.PaulRoark.com
> 
> _________________________________________
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark" <
> paul.roark@v...> wrote:
> > My testing of Epson UltraSmooth paper showed a dmax with Epson 
drivers and
> > Museum/MIS 7600 matte black that was less than EEM.  Also, EEM beat it 
on
> > smoothness.  The sample I was sent was thicker than EEM but felt
> thinner --
> > the cotton softness that I'm not fond of.  While I'll probably use the
> paper
> > for my museum old-photo restorations, I'll probably continue to use EEM
> for
> > my personal work.
> >
> > I have not heard any price for the paper.  I think its popularity will be
> > largely affected by the price.
> >
> > Paul
> > http://www.PaulRoark.com