Yahoo Groups archive

Digital BW, The Print

Index last updated: 2026-04-28 22:56 UTC

Message

Re: Paper choices

2006-02-01 by James Parker

Hi Bill --

That's the 50 dollar question. I'm in the same boat as you regarding which
excellent paper to try next. I like the Epson Ultra Smooth Fine Art paper,
which you can get in 13 x 19. I believe you can find it it at Inkjetart --
http://www.inkjetart.com/pro/ultrasmooth.html. The Velvet Fine Art is also
nice.

Hahnemuhle PhotoRag is also well regarded, and has a nice feel for a matte
paper. Entrada and Condor are beautiful as well. I would recommend that you
get a box of HPR to compare with what you're currently using. You can also
order sample packs from shadesofpaper.com, moab, hawkmountain and inkjetart
to see how the paper looks and compares to others, before getting too
involved in buying a box of this and that. There are just too many darn nice
papers, and not enough ink!!

Most folks use the EEM as a proofing paper, as it has a pretty good dmax and
mimics the look of the more expensive papers.

If you haven't read it already, Clayton's Paper Chase article will give you
lots of ideas. http://www.cjcom.net/articles/digiprn5.htm

I've printed a couple of long panoramas on the Premium Lustre -- they came
out very rich in the blacks and I liked the look of the paper overall. Did
these on a 2200 with the roll Lustre. Have also printed these on the 7800
using EEM, and for these images, the Lustre looks a lot nicer. For me, it's
more of a hassle to keep swapping the ink carts, and costly, too, on the
large format machines. But the look of the satin/lustre paper can be very
beneficial to black and white images. I'm planning to do some testing along
those lines after I finish this month's production runs.

Jim Parker

On 1/31/06 2:32 PM, "DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com"
<DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

> Message: 7       
>    Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 10:31:31 -0500
>    From: wgh2005 <wgh2005@...>
> Subject: Paper choices
> 
> I'm an amateur, a hobbyist. I have a long background of amateur photo
> processing/printing using wet chemicals. Although I've done a little
> digital ink-jet BW printing in the past, I'm just beginning to get serious
> about it. My printer is an Epson R1800 - not the choice of the serious BW
> printers here, I know - but that's what I have to work with. Monitor
> calibrated. Custom printer profiles. Converting to BW from RAW files using
> Adobe Camera Raw and the Channels technique in PS CS2.
> 
> Like everyone else, I would like the best range of BW tonalities I can get,
> using my equipment. Eventually I will no doubt move on (or up?) to QTRIP,
> but for now I'll continue with the ACR-Channels method, which seems to
> produce acceptable results.
> 
> I've followed the threads about various papers. So far, I've only tried
> digital BW prints on Epson Enhanced Matte (EEM) and Epson Premium Glossy
> Photo Paper (PGPP). These aren't discussed, when folks write comparisons of
> various BW papers - so I wonder - can someone give me an idea of their
> relative Dmax? Of course I'm familiar with the paper colors and the tint of
> the resulting prints using the 1800.
> 
> I also have a small supply of Epson Premium Luster. Would that be an
> appropriate paper to use for BW prints? What are its strengths and weaknesses?
> 
> I see mention here of a paper called Epson Ultra Smooth, which I don't see
> on the Epson site. Where is it obtained? Or is it available only in sizes
> which wouldn't be appropriate for an amateur? I've come to really like a
> matter surface, but I know well that glossy and semi-gloss papers have a
> greater potential Dmax or color gamut. "Pearl" surface papers are okay, but
> I'd love to find something smoother than matte but less glaring than PGPP.
> 
> Next and final question today - what would people here suggest as a "next
> paper" for me to try in BW prints?
> 
> Thanks - Bill Hansen

Attachments

Move to quarantaine

This moves the raw source file on disk only. The archive index is not changed automatically, so you still need to run a manual refresh afterward.