Digital BW, The Print

Frank, I hate to take issue with you, but I agree and disagree. Velvet
Fine Art, in all it's incarnations, is probably the most tested and
wrangled with paper by some of us since we began inkjet printing.
Somerset Velvet was the most workable before coated papers came along.
Somerset Enhanced was the first usable coated paper after some Liege
paper that had the longevity of an ant. These papers still have my
admiration because of their beautiful surfaces. EVFA is rebranded
Somerset Enhanced. Unfortunately, they do not have the dmax of the H
papers, and tend to have mottle problems with certain ink loads. With
many images, without a side by side comparison, these issues may fade
to irrelevance, particularly given the beautiful surface.
Though PhotoRag outperforms Velvet in these ways, it's surface is too
card like for me.
I agree that William Turner is gorgeous, not as brightened as
PhotoRag, performs as well or better than all the others, and is my
paper of choice. A nationally well know photographer was in here
having us print for him the other day and wound up selecting WT,
suprised to see that the tooth did not take away from image sharpness
as he had assumed anything but a smooth surface would do. Many
photographers autiomatically select smooth surfaces because of
presumptions about how a photograph should look, rather than actually
looking at the papers and prints as something new.
If only it's surface had the more supple tooth of Velvet, I'd be a
happy camper.
Tyler

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "culturalvisions"
<fmward@h...> wrote:
> I'm always happy when someone else confirms my findings.  Epson Velvet 
> Fine Art is the best paper for exhibition and portfolio printing. 
When sli=
> ghtly 
> less texture and warmth is required, H. Photo Rag is perfect.  When
slightl=
> y 
> more tooth is desired, H. William Turner is heaven to the touch.  
> 
> The link to Hawk Mountain is really the added bonus to your
comparisons.  
> I've been searching for a quality paper for less money and HM's product 
> seems to be almost half the price.  I'm looking forward to trying them.
> 
> Speaking of price, EVFA can be bought at 
> http://www.atlex.com 
> for considerably less than inkjetart. 
> http://www.mediastreet.com
> has Hahnemuhle under its own name for slightly less money.
> Royal Renaissance is HPR and Royal Jazz is HWT.
> You folks probably already know that.
> 
> Frank
> 
> http://www.photoeye.com/gallery/forms/index.cfm?image=1&id=46924&
> imagePosition=1&Door=2&Portfolio=Portfolio1&Gallery=2
> 
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Clayton Jones" <
> cj@c...> wrote:
> > Hello Steve,
> > 
> > Thanks for the report.  You sound like a happy camper <g>.
> > 
> > 
> > >1) Epson Velvet fine art 13x19: Awsome paper 
> > 
> > It does have an incredible richness and depth.  Amazing stuff.
> > 
> > 
> > >2) H. photo rag 308 13x19: Great texture and depth.  Hard to tell
> > >the print apart from the epson velvet fine art.  Will likely not 
> > >order again because it is the most expensive, and I had trouble 
> > >seeing the difference from epson velvet fine art. It is ever so
> > >slightly less warm.
> > 
> > Perhaps I'm over-sensitized from too much looking, but I see quite a
> > difference between them, and not just being warmer.  VFA has a texture
> > to it and takes the ink dots differently - PR has smoother mid tones.
> > I'm keeping PR in my arsenal for now until I find something to replace
> > it.  Right now there's nothing else quite like it.
> > 
> > 
> > >4) Hawk Mountain Merlin Smooth:  It will probably be my best all 
> > >around paper.
> > 
> > Same here.  Great stuff.
> > 
> > 
> > >I think the Hahnemühle Photo Rag did not display greater Dmax
> > >then the Hawk Mountain papers.
> > 
> > I have examined carefully for this since reading Paul Roark's
> > densitometer figures.  I forget the actual numbers, but the Dmax of
> > these papers is excellent, and on prints with small or broken up areas
> > of black it looks just as good.  However, one of my test prints has a
> > large solid black background and when comparing these prints the
> > greater Dmax on PR can be seen.  But it's an unhappy photographer who
> > lives purely the numbers.  These papers are excellent - contrasty and
> > punchy - and prints on them can hold up against PR or any of the
> > others.
> > 
> > Keep up the good work.
> > 
> > Regards,
> > Clayton
> > 
> > 
> > Info on black and white digital printing at    
> > http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm