Digital BW, The Print

Tyler Boley wrote:

>It seems as though there are finally some options for the performance
>Hahnem\ufffdhle papers have been providing for B&W printing. 
>
Collected some quotes of messages on the Innova range since I tested 
them after the Photokina last year.

I've printed sheets of several Innova papers and I have to say
that the coating is at the Hahnemuhle level in sharpness and

saturation if not better. Will test the density when the prints 
are drier. Used the same profile that I use for HM and the 
MIS7600 inks in the 10000CF. Epson driver. Almost equal in color. 
I don't believe the papers are rebranded, the substrate is 
different. Given the roll sizes this is an interesting paper.  I 
believe that it still is a bit above the price we pay for 
Hahnemuhle but they come close enough. The coating may be as 
delicate as HM's in handling, have to check that further.

Googling on Innova's papers I came across the following page:

http://www.digitaloutput.net/dq/dq0917.html

At the bottom there's a reference for Innova USA with Wayne 
Connelly also mentioned. If I remember it correctly he worked for 
Hahnemuhle USA (Dia-Nielsen) 3-4 years ago. I have talked with 
him on the HM stand then.  I see at another page that Mark 
Messina also a former HM man is the head of Innova Editions. 
Wonder whether they took the crown jewels with them when they 
left HM.


Ernst



Jim Doyle wrote:


>> Innova papers are specifically formulated to have excellent color gamut and
>> density. The process of making the paper is more efficient and therefore the
>> papers cost much less than Arches or Hahnemuhle. Same performance at a lower
>> cost.. Here In The States The Rolls are 11 Ft longer Than Hahnemuhle..
>  
>
The roll length difference will be the same here as I understand it. And 
they print excellent. I see small reflecting speckles on the surface 
that I haven't seen on the HM coating. As if there are micro size mica 
or glass particles in the coating. Reflection at 45 degrees 
approximately, best seen on the Fibaprint quality as it is the smoothest.

>> The 2 owners of Innova were instrumental in the success of Hahnemuhle and
>> they are now out on their own..As Innova Fine Art.. www.innovart.com
>  
>
If they can keep up the quality with increasing demand then I see a rosy 
future for them. They deserve it IMHO, first time I see a real 
competitive art paper to HM. Ernst

"I have measured the D max of the Innova papers and I get a 
> slightly lower Dmax than what I can get with Photo Rag for the 
> papers. Same "color" profile and the Epson driver, 720 dpi, 
> 10000CF with MIS7600 inks. Epson Semigloss paper setting. Photo 
> Rag 1.54/1.55 D and the Innova papers ranging from 1.51 to 1.53 D.
> 
> However the Innova paper shows it could have a higher load of ink 
> as there's no bleeding in the details where PR shows some 
> bleeding. The Semigloss setting is quite good for PR + an RGB 
> custom profile but I guess that Innova could use another paper 
> setting in the Epson driver that gives more ink. The 10000CF 
> driver does have some extra choices and I have a RIP that can 
> change the inklimit. What I'm curious about is which (Epson 
> driver) paper setting Innova recommends for the Ultrachrome 
> printers. A nice high gloss Innova brochure with all the details 
> to start your art printing business but nothing that may help you 
> with making your own RGB profiles :-)
> 
> The samples book has a bluish B&W print on its first page 
> (Fibaprint), the black measured there is 1.66 D. It is printed 
> with a colour printer as there are yellow and blue dots in the 
> highlights.  I presume an Ultrachrome print as a dye print could 
> easily go above 1.66 D.  I guess that's about the highest Dmax 
> you can get with Ultrachrome and the Epson driver, more (pigment) 
> ink doesn't improve the density either at that level. It shows 
> however that another paper setting could be used.
> 
> I can get 1.67 D on Photo Rag with the MIS Ultratone Quad inks 
> but that requires the RIP with an Epson 9000. The paper settings 
> are more limited with the Eposn 9000 driver."
> 
> The Innova sample was printed on a 2200 as I understand it now, 
> could still be with a RIP but nevertheless I think the papers are 
> equal to HM in Dmax too. So far I do not have the feeling that 
> the lower price means a quality compromise.
> 
> Ernst

Stephen:

Recently received samples of Proof Line and Innova papers.  After
profiling and running test prints, this is what I've found. YMMV and I
encourage you to do your own test as I have different criteria for my
judgments than you will.

Since I print my own work and that of others, I typically look for
high detail, good color and blacks (as neutral as possible) and ease
of use.

I have not based any judgments on price as I feel that is a secondary
concern to results.

I found the Proof Line photo Gloss and  Photo Luster to be very good.
 They printed smoother and with higher apparent depth than the Epson
Premium glossy papers.  I've never been a fan of Epson's glossy paper
line anyway as the RC base has out gassing problems. These Proofline
papers are RC based as well, but look good, and are subject to
outgassing as well.

However, here's the rub. On the sample sheets I received, the Photo
Luster is very white base and very bright.  The Photo gloss is
noticeably darker, with a warmish, slightly yellow cast.  The Photo
Semi-Matte is a little different from the Luster and Photo Gloss.

That might be a problem for some as I look for a consistent color in
the paper bases within a similar product line.  If the choice is
between Photo Gloss and Photo Luster papers in a product line, I want
the visible difference to be only in the finish, not in the entire
image from changes in base color.

Having said that, they are good papers.

If I was looking for an Epson replacement, the glossy and Luster gave
me good results and I would have no problem in using them.

The fine-art paper (310gsm) printed well enough. A little too textured
for me (remember, I'm printing photographic detail), but should be
fine for other output.  This is about as light a fine-art paper as I
would use.  

Being used to Arches 355 gsm, most everything seems light. Yet some
papers (while both claim to be the same weight) just feels more solid
and substantial in the hand.

Still working on the Innova tests, but I've had a problem with the 280
gsm Ultra Smooth FibaPrint.

I take printing papers out of their protective wrap and acclimate them
to the temperature (72-75) and relative humidity (55-65%)in my
printing room and workrooms.

The 280 gsm paper was out only a couple of hours before printing the
profile sheets.  Printed OK, but two days later the sheets had really
curled, and the remaining sheet I was going to use for my standard
test print was so curled as to cause a head strike.  The other Innova
papers (315 Smooth and
315 soft texure) did not curl.  I'm not a paper scientist, but it
seems this paper really absorbed some moisture from the air.

I hope I'm incorrect as a paper that sensitive to air moisture has the
potential for problems throughout the whole process-from printing
through framing.

I welcome any suggestions as to what else might be causing the curl as
I do not wish to label a paper as faulty on my test alone.

I'll do test prints on the Innova Photo Smooth and Soft Texture papers
when I get time and let you know the results.

Regards,

Stephen

www.stephengreenfield


End of quotes.

So far I have not used much of the Innova range as there are still a lot of HM rolls here and we get the last at a very competitive price. Customers are also a bit conservative, asking for the same paper again. The Innova papers are also a bit more carton like in their stiffness, HM is more flexible. The German Etching texture falls in between the two Innova textured paper qualities, if I had to replace the German Etching I would take the rougher one.

Ernst








------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->