Digital BW, The Print

Lou, thanks for your comments. I had not heard much about Museo and it seems like 
some of the heavy-weight, textured papers do have higher Dmax than others (is that due 
to the optics of looking at the ink on textured surfaces? I thought it was supposed to be 
glossy papers that gave more of an illusion of higher Dmax due to relfectance.....it's all 
somehwat convoluted to me), which is a drag becuase I don't want texture. I also don't 
want to get too hung up on micro-fine Dmax distinctions, but having said that it is still 
important as there is so much deep black in my images.

I guess there is no such thing as a perfect paper, just ones that do the job better than 
others, depending on what that job is and what tools you're using. I can't believe how 
much $$ I have spent on ink and paper!

Thanks again,
Sarah



--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Louis Dina" <lbdina@c...> wrote:
>
> Sarah,
> 
> Some possibilities.....
> 
> Innova Papers are about 1/3 the price of the HPR.  Supposedly, some 
> people from Hahnemuhle formed Innova, so the weight is similar.  The 
> Fiba-print and Smooth Cotton papers are acid free and have about the 
> same Dmax as HPR.  I have just run a few Dmax tests, but haven't 
> built any profiles or done any prints yet.  www.shadesofpaper.com has 
> a sampler pack with two sheets each of 4 different Innova papers, if 
> you are interested.  Included in the sampler are Cold Press Art and 
> Soft Textured Art papers, but of which are much more textured.  I 
> didn't see any mention of optical brighteners in any of the 
> litereature, so you will probably have to ask Jim Doyle at Shades of 
> Paper if they have any.
> 
> Another good paper at a reasonable price is Moab Entrada.  These 
> papers are reasonably priced and coated on both sides.  The Bright 
> White has optical Brighteners, but the Natural has none at all.  Both 
> are acid free.  I have lots of nice prints on both.  Moab papers had 
> some paper dust problems initially, but they responded to complaints 
> and are doing a good job now of shipping dust free product.  
> 
> Crane Museo II is a gorgeous, heavy paper (365 gsm), but has more 
> texture than the ones mentioned above, more like the textured Innova 
> papers.  It is more expensive than the above papers, but less than 
> HPR.  Museo II is coated on both sides and the quality is superb.  
> Dmax is comparable to HPR from what I have seen in my tests.  
> 
> Epson Velvet Fine Art is also a wonderful archival paper.  It has the 
> best Dmax of any paper I have personally used so far (with UC-MK 
> inkset), but is a little pricey.  Sheet sizes are limited, but 
> available in 13x19.  One of my favorites.
> 
> Epson Enhanced Matte is also a great performer, but is not acid 
> free.  Many have commented on yellowing, but I haven't seen any in my 
> EEM prints (so far).  I use a fair amount of it, but not for prints I 
> would sell.  It's not worth the risk to me.  Probably one of the best 
> performers, right behind VFA.  Actually, I was testing the Innova 
> papers looking for an acid-free archival EEM substitute that is 
> reasonably priced.  They are nice papers but don't have quite as good 
> a Dmax in my testing so far.  The smooth cotton and fiba-print are 
> contenders with a similar smooth finish but heavier than EEM.
> 
> All the papers above are available in sheets, and many in rolls.  I 
> use them with both my 2200 and my 4000 with the UC inkset.  I have 
> also used some of them with MIS UT-7 inks in my 2200 and they perform 
> well.  FWIW, the 4000 driver seems a little weak on matte papers, but 
> QTR (with standard UC inks) can hit higher Dmax levels than the 
> driver.  I suspect the 4000 driver was set a little conservatively 
> for matte papers, but Epson will never admit it.  The fact that I can 
> get the 4000 to reach higher Dmax levels using QTR with UC inks tends 
> to support this contention, so it isn't the printer itself.  This 
> doesn't seem to be an issue with glossy, semigloss or luster media.  
> I haven't had this issue with the 2200 and the 2200 driver, which 
> seem to perform well with the standard UC inkset on matte papers.  
> 
> Hope this provides some food for thought.  
> 
> Lou
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "sagaface" 
> <sagaface@y...> wrote:
> >
> > I have read with great interest Clayton's article on papers but 
> wondered what some of you 
> > are gravitating towards, specifically, what are you all printing on 
> for sale or exhibition? I 
> > like HPR's characterisitcs...all except the price and the flaking. 
> Ultrasmooth sounds 
> > promising but I'm on a 2200 and would like sheets.
> > 
> > Anyone?
> > 
> > Sarah
> >
>