Digital BW, The Print

I've also seen samples of Hahnemuhle Photo Rag from my local paper rep.  
It looks damn good.  When placed side by side with EAM, Photo Rag has a 
warmer surface.  For me it is a better printing paper than William 
Turner because the WT surface continues to flake off ruining the print.  
I don't want to make a high-end print and be afraid to take it out of 
it's plastic storage bag.  My local paper rep. recommends brushing off 
any fine art paper before printing with it.  With WT brushing still 
doesn't get all the flakes.  Photo Rag is certainly a great 
possibility, but nothing is going to match the economic value of EAM.
Frank
http://www.culturalvisions.com


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., ruhrfoto@y... wrote:
> I´ll send this message to the Piezo and the Digital BW-Print list, it 
> is identicall on both lists, no need to read it twice.
> 
> Fellows,
> 
> I had the opportunity to test 8 sheets of 16x24 inch  (approx. 24 x 
> letter size) Hahnemühle´s new Photo Rag 308gsm paper last 
> week which will be shipped to distributors in the US in some 
> weeks.
> 
> It has been told before by other group members, that the paper 
> will be available in all sheet- and roll sizes you usually buy 
> Hahnemühle papers.
> It comes in 188 and 308 gsm.
> The surface is much smooother than W. Turner (Wells River) 
> and smoother than German Etching (Orwell) too,  but not quite 
> as smooth as EAM. The color of the unprinted sheet is like GE to 
> my eyeballs (but Hahnemühle claims it is a little bit brighter). 
> Coating is the same as GE/WT-coating
> 
> Test:
> Image: Industrial site (steel mill with blast furnace) on a sunny 
> day with clouds in the sky (wide tonal range).
> I rescanned  two 8x10 inch BW negs on an Agfa Duoscan HiD at 
> 1000x2000 dpi in 48 bit RGB, converted to greyscale in PS and 
> applied only one gradation-curve, so I got unsplitted 
> histogramms.
> First proofing was on EAM.  End-proof was on German Etching. 
> Finally I printed the image on Photo Rag always using the CTM 
> profile.
> 
> Results:
> To make a long story short:  To my eyeball-meter tonal range, 
> blacks, shadow- and highlight detail are very similar, so the 
> overall impression of the GE and the Photo Rag prints is rather 
> alike: same coating/same printing characteristics. 
> 
> Surface:
> The main difference is the surface character of the papers.
> As the surface of PR is smoother, the whole print remembers 
> more than GE to a print on matte double-weight photo paper. 
> And because the surface is smooth there is no micro aberrance 
> of ink as it is caused by the rougher surface of GE. That adds to 
> a slightly sharper impression of the PR print. If you inspect this 
> with the magnifyer you will find that this is a consequence of a 
> greater accutance of the PR print.
> On the other hand it is the special surface of the GE-paper  
> which supports this certain "Fine Art Feeling" the print evokes in 
> your hand and your eyes. This is lost a little bit with Photo Rag.
> Though it is a heavyweight paper, it hasn´t got this strong feeling 
> GE has.
> Flaking:
> I havn´t got serious flaking problems with GE. Under the 
> magnifyer you can see some micro flaking though, which isn´t 
> obvious to your eyes. This is much less the case with Photo 
> Rag.
> 
> Summary:
> If your goal is to get as near as possible to silver prints with 
> Piezo: choose Photo Rag.
> If Piezo for you is an alternate medium to print Fine Art Black and 
> White Photography and you love the characteristics of a nearly 
> 500 years old "Büttenpapier" you may wish to stay with German 
> Etching.
> 
> Have a nice weekend.
> 
> Greetings from Germany
> Bernd Langmack