Digital BW, The Print

I am running Eboni 6 (thanks again to Paul Roark for sharing his knowledge) and printing on Epson Hot Press Rag.

While I like the look of these prints, for me they lack a little of the pop and contrast that you get from a traditional B&W silver print. I've never been a fan of matte surface, but the Eboni on the Hot Press Rag has a great Dmax and I've been converted by necessity. Still, I miss the silver print look, and glossy pigments seem to be a PITA.

Today, I took some of my prints and gave them several coats of Sureguard luster spray. YES!!!!  The very slight luster takes them from very good to great. Easily the best prints I have ever made outside of a darkroom. They glow.

Give it a shot. It may be just what you need.

Parker Smith
www.ParkerSmithFineArt.com

"Parker Smith" <parkersmithphoto@...> wrote:
>
> I am running Eboni 6 ... on Epson Hot Press Rag.
> ...
> Today, I took some of my prints and gave them several coats of Sureguard luster spray. YES!!!!  The very slight luster takes them from very good to great. Easily the best prints I have ever made outside of a darkroom. They glow.


Interesting.  I'm not familiar with Sureguard luster spray, but it appears to be a solvent-based spray, perhaps similar to Premier Art's Print Shield. Do you know if it is similar?

I usually think of these as reducing the dmax.  Did this Sureguard spray actually increase the dmax?

I'll try some Print Shield and see what happens.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

I tried spraying a test strip of Epson Hot Press Natural with Premier Art Print Shield. I gave it 3 light coatings, with just a minute or so between to dry (it's about 80 degrees f. here).  I used the Epson 1100 with Eboni-4 in it.  The profile is a partitioned one.

There is a visible difference, but only some of the difference shows up in the spectro readings of the sprayed versus un-sprayed version.

The sprayed test strip looks darker.  The 50%, for example, has a Lab L of 51 on the sprayed test strip, versus 59 for the un-sprayed test strip.  The sprayed 100% patch does not have a deep a black, being Lab L = 19 v. 16 for the un-sprayed.  The cross-over where they are the same in the shadows is 85%.  The paper white is essentially unchanged.

Lab B also changes some, but not at all for the paper itself (Lab B = 2.7 for the paper).  The maximum warmth for both test strips is at 20%, with the sprayed version being a bit higher, at 4.7, v. 4.0 for the un-sprayed test strip.  So, the sprayed has the change in Lab B of 2 v. 1.3 for the un-sprayed version.

The visual change that that does not show up in the spectro readings, and that I don't, frankly, understand, is the the sprayed version looks smoother.  This is not a huge change, but for some reason the impression, to me, is that the sprayed version is just a bit smoother.

Overall, I'd probably opt for the more neutral, un-sprayed version, but there is a visual difference there that is more than I'd assumed.  

The amount and type of spray, of course, are variables.  

The water-based coatings, as we know, can give a glossy look with a very high dmax.  I'm not sure if I could put enough solvent-based Print Shield on the paper to achieve that look.  I never found a water-based coating that I could apply evenly to large prints.  So, I've never found a water-based spray solution that worked for me.

At any rate, the Print Shield does give a somewhat different look, and other sprays might give different looks yet.  I've always liked the Lascaux because of its relatively lower impact on the dmax.  I'll try one of those next.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com 



--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Parker Smith" <parkersmithphoto@...> wrote:

>
> I am running Eboni 6 (thanks again to Paul Roark for sharing his knowledge) and printing on Epson Hot Press Rag.
> 
> While I like the look of these prints, for me they lack a little of the pop and contrast that you get from a traditional B&W silver print. I've never been a fan of matte surface, but the Eboni on the Hot Press Rag has a great Dmax and I've been converted by necessity. Still, I miss the silver print look, and glossy pigments seem to be a PITA.
> 
> Today, I took some of my prints and gave them several coats of Sureguard luster spray. YES!!!!  The very slight luster takes them from very good to great. Easily the best prints I have ever made outside of a darkroom. They glow.
> 
> Give it a shot. It may be just what you need.
> 
> Parker Smith
> www.ParkerSmithFineArt.com
>

If you want to experiment, try the Rosco Clear Arylic gloss(matte) glaze. It's only $40/gallon, and you dilute it 1 to 1 with water. I use a cheap wagner HVLP gun. The matte is dead matte. I mix it with the gloss for a semi-matte look on water resistant canvas. Next time I have the gun out, I'll try some on art paper and see what it does and report.

John Nollendorfs

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul" <roark.paul@...> wrote:

>
> I tried spraying a test strip of Epson Hot Press Natural with Premier Art Print Shield. I gave it 3 light coatings, with just a minute or so between to dry (it's about 80 degrees f. here).  I used the Epson 1100 with Eboni-4 in it.  The profile is a partitioned one.
> 
> There is a visible difference, but only some of the difference shows up in the spectro readings of the sprayed versus un-sprayed version.
> 
> The sprayed test strip looks darker.  The 50%, for example, has a Lab L of 51 on the sprayed test strip, versus 59 for the un-sprayed test strip.  The sprayed 100% patch does not have a deep a black, being Lab L = 19 v. 16 for the un-sprayed.  The cross-over where they are the same in the shadows is 85%.  The paper white is essentially unchanged.
> 
> Lab B also changes some, but not at all for the paper itself (Lab B = 2.7 for the paper).  The maximum warmth for both test strips is at 20%, with the sprayed version being a bit higher, at 4.7, v. 4.0 for the un-sprayed test strip.  So, the sprayed has the change in Lab B of 2 v. 1.3 for the un-sprayed version.
> 
> The visual change that that does not show up in the spectro readings, and that I don't, frankly, understand, is the the sprayed version looks smoother.  This is not a huge change, but for some reason the impression, to me, is that the sprayed version is just a bit smoother.
> 
> Overall, I'd probably opt for the more neutral, un-sprayed version, but there is a visual difference there that is more than I'd assumed.  
> 
> The amount and type of spray, of course, are variables.  
> 
> The water-based coatings, as we know, can give a glossy look with a very high dmax.  I'm not sure if I could put enough solvent-based Print Shield on the paper to achieve that look.  I never found a water-based coating that I could apply evenly to large prints.  So, I've never found a water-based spray solution that worked for me.
> 
> At any rate, the Print Shield does give a somewhat different look, and other sprays might give different looks yet.  I've always liked the Lascaux because of its relatively lower impact on the dmax.  I'll try one of those next.
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com 
> 
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Parker Smith" <parkersmithphoto@> wrote:
> >
> > I am running Eboni 6 (thanks again to Paul Roark for sharing his knowledge) and printing on Epson Hot Press Rag.
> > 
> > While I like the look of these prints, for me they lack a little of the pop and contrast that you get from a traditional B&W silver print. I've never been a fan of matte surface, but the Eboni on the Hot Press Rag has a great Dmax and I've been converted by necessity. Still, I miss the silver print look, and glossy pigments seem to be a PITA.
> > 
> > Today, I took some of my prints and gave them several coats of Sureguard luster spray. YES!!!!  The very slight luster takes them from very good to great. Easily the best prints I have ever made outside of a darkroom. They glow.
> > 
> > Give it a shot. It may be just what you need.
> > 
> > Parker Smith
> > www.ParkerSmithFineArt.com
> >
>

Just sprayed a print on Hawk Mountain Condor with the vinyl acrylic Rosco product, Mixed 3 parts gloss with one part matte and diluted 1 to 1 with water. (my regular canvas spray mixture) For matte papers though, I would probably use 1 to 1 gloss and matte diluted with water 1 to to. Need to experiment with mixture! Used just one light coat. Results looked good! Compared to unsprayed, had slightly "richer" look. Would recommend sealing microporous papers, if prints will not be displayed behind glass. 
John Nollendorfs 

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "John" <jrnolly@...> wrote:

>
> If you want to experiment, try the Rosco Clear Arylic gloss(matte) glaze. It's only $40/gallon, and you dilute it 1 to 1 with water. I use a cheap wagner HVLP gun. The matte is dead matte. I mix it with the gloss for a semi-matte look on water resistant canvas. Next time I have the gun out, I'll try some on art paper and see what it does and report.
> 
> John Nollendorfs
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul" <roark.paul@> wrote:
> >
> > I tried spraying a test strip of Epson Hot Press Natural with Premier Art Print Shield. I gave it 3 light coatings, with just a minute or so between to dry (it's about 80 degrees f. here).  I used the Epson 1100 with Eboni-4 in it.  The profile is a partitioned one.
> > 
> > There is a visible difference, but only some of the difference shows up in the spectro readings of the sprayed versus un-sprayed version.
> > 
> > The sprayed test strip looks darker.  The 50%, for example, has a Lab L of 51 on the sprayed test strip, versus 59 for the un-sprayed test strip.  The sprayed 100% patch does not have a deep a black, being Lab L = 19 v. 16 for the un-sprayed.  The cross-over where they are the same in the shadows is 85%.  The paper white is essentially unchanged.
> > 
> > Lab B also changes some, but not at all for the paper itself (Lab B = 2.7 for the paper).  The maximum warmth for both test strips is at 20%, with the sprayed version being a bit higher, at 4.7, v. 4.0 for the un-sprayed test strip.  So, the sprayed has the change in Lab B of 2 v. 1.3 for the un-sprayed version.
> > 
> > The visual change that that does not show up in the spectro readings, and that I don't, frankly, understand, is the the sprayed version looks smoother.  This is not a huge change, but for some reason the impression, to me, is that the sprayed version is just a bit smoother.
> > 
> > Overall, I'd probably opt for the more neutral, un-sprayed version, but there is a visual difference there that is more than I'd assumed.  
> > 
> > The amount and type of spray, of course, are variables.  
> > 
> > The water-based coatings, as we know, can give a glossy look with a very high dmax.  I'm not sure if I could put enough solvent-based Print Shield on the paper to achieve that look.  I never found a water-based coating that I could apply evenly to large prints.  So, I've never found a water-based spray solution that worked for me.
> > 
> > At any rate, the Print Shield does give a somewhat different look, and other sprays might give different looks yet.  I've always liked the Lascaux because of its relatively lower impact on the dmax.  I'll try one of those next.
> > 
> > Paul
> > www.PaulRoark.com 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Parker Smith" <parkersmithphoto@> wrote:
> > >
> > > I am running Eboni 6 (thanks again to Paul Roark for sharing his knowledge) and printing on Epson Hot Press Rag.
> > > 
> > > While I like the look of these prints, for me they lack a little of the pop and contrast that you get from a traditional B&W silver print. I've never been a fan of matte surface, but the Eboni on the Hot Press Rag has a great Dmax and I've been converted by necessity. Still, I miss the silver print look, and glossy pigments seem to be a PITA.
> > > 
> > > Today, I took some of my prints and gave them several coats of Sureguard luster spray. YES!!!!  The very slight luster takes them from very good to great. Easily the best prints I have ever made outside of a darkroom. They glow.
> > > 
> > > Give it a shot. It may be just what you need.
> > > 
> > > Parker Smith
> > > www.ParkerSmithFineArt.com
> > >
> >
>

Can this process be done by using a painter's brush, a plastic spray 
bottle like Windex bottle?

What is major components of the Premier Art print shield, Rosco acrylic 
glossy glaze, Sureguard luster spray? Can they be self-formulated?

Thanks,
Phil

On 8/3/2011 12:52 PM, John wrote:
>
> Just sprayed a print on Hawk Mountain Condor with the vinyl acrylic 
> Rosco product, Mixed 3 parts gloss with one part matte and diluted 1 
> to 1 with water. (my regular canvas spray mixture) For matte papers 
> though, I would probably use 1 to 1 gloss and matte diluted with water 
> 1 to to. Need to experiment with mixture! Used just one light coat. 
> Results looked good! Compared to unsprayed, had slightly "richer" 
> look. Would recommend sealing microporous papers, if prints will not 
> be displayed behind glass.
> John Nollendorfs
>
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com 
> <mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint%40yahoogroups.com>, "John" 
> <jrnolly@...> wrote:
> >
> > If you want to experiment, try the Rosco Clear Arylic gloss(matte) 
> glaze. It's only $40/gallon, and you dilute it 1 to 1 with water. I 
> use a cheap wagner HVLP gun. The matte is dead matte. I mix it with 
> the gloss for a semi-matte look on water resistant canvas. Next time I 
> have the gun out, I'll try some on art paper and see what it does and 
> report.
> >
> > John Nollendorfs
> >
> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com 
> <mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint%40yahoogroups.com>, "Paul" 
> <roark.paul@> wrote:
> > >
> > > I tried spraying a test strip of Epson Hot Press Natural with 
> Premier Art Print Shield. I gave it 3 light coatings, with just a 
> minute or so between to dry (it's about 80 degrees f. here). I used 
> the Epson 1100 with Eboni-4 in it. The profile is a partitioned one.
> > >
> > > There is a visible difference, but only some of the difference 
> shows up in the spectro readings of the sprayed versus un-sprayed version.
> > >
> > > The sprayed test strip looks darker. The 50%, for example, has a 
> Lab L of 51 on the sprayed test strip, versus 59 for the un-sprayed 
> test strip. The sprayed 100% patch does not have a deep a black, being 
> Lab L = 19 v. 16 for the un-sprayed. The cross-over where they are the 
> same in the shadows is 85%. The paper white is essentially unchanged.
> > >
> > > Lab B also changes some, but not at all for the paper itself (Lab 
> B = 2.7 for the paper). The maximum warmth for both test strips is at 
> 20%, with the sprayed version being a bit higher, at 4.7, v. 4.0 for 
> the un-sprayed test strip. So, the sprayed has the change in Lab B of 
> 2 v. 1.3 for the un-sprayed version.
> > >
> > > The visual change that that does not show up in the spectro 
> readings, and that I don't, frankly, understand, is the the sprayed 
> version looks smoother. This is not a huge change, but for some reason 
> the impression, to me, is that the sprayed version is just a bit smoother.
> > >
> > > Overall, I'd probably opt for the more neutral, un-sprayed 
> version, but there is a visual difference there that is more than I'd 
> assumed.
> > >
> > > The amount and type of spray, of course, are variables.
> > >
> > > The water-based coatings, as we know, can give a glossy look with 
> a very high dmax. I'm not sure if I could put enough solvent-based 
> Print Shield on the paper to achieve that look. I never found a 
> water-based coating that I could apply evenly to large prints. So, 
> I've never found a water-based spray solution that worked for me.
> > >
> > > At any rate, the Print Shield does give a somewhat different look, 
> and other sprays might give different looks yet. I've always liked the 
> Lascaux because of its relatively lower impact on the dmax. I'll try 
> one of those next.
> > >
> > > Paul
> > > www.PaulRoark.com
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com 
> <mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint%40yahoogroups.com>, "Parker 
> Smith" <parkersmithphoto@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I am running Eboni 6 (thanks again to Paul Roark for sharing his 
> knowledge) and printing on Epson Hot Press Rag.
> > > >
> > > > While I like the look of these prints, for me they lack a little 
> of the pop and contrast that you get from a traditional B&W silver 
> print. I've never been a fan of matte surface, but the Eboni on the 
> Hot Press Rag has a great Dmax and I've been converted by necessity. 
> Still, I miss the silver print look, and glossy pigments seem to be a 
> PITA.
> > > >
> > > > Today, I took some of my prints and gave them several coats of 
> Sureguard luster spray. YES!!!! The very slight luster takes them from 
> very good to great. Easily the best prints I have ever made outside of 
> a darkroom. They glow.
> > > >
> > > > Give it a shot. It may be just what you need.
> > > >
> > > > Parker Smith
> > > > www.ParkerSmithFineArt.com
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

"John" <jrnolly@...> wrote:

> Just sprayed a print on Hawk Mountain Condor with the vinyl acrylic Rosco product, ... wagner HVLP gun. ...

What has stopped my experiments with the water-based sprays in the past include the need for a HVLP sprayer.  A quick search seems to indicate the Wagner HVLP units are much cheaper and maybe more practical than they used to be.  

I'd be real curious if this technology would allow an Eboni-6 print on Epson Hot Press paper (or Condor for that matter) to be coated in a manner that would protect it without glazing and also not cause the warmth to increase significantly.  That could be a significant step forward.

John, thanks for your posting on this matter.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

FYI, Rockler has a great price on an HVLP spray setup. I haven't used it,
but it gets very good review online.

http://www.rockler.com/product.cfm?page=10469


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Paul:
There was no change in the color of the print, only made them slightly richer looking. If you send me a print, I would be happy to apply the spray for you to judge for yourself. Just drop me an e-mail and I will send you my snail mail address. I'll even mix up a 50-50 mixture of matte/gloss to see how it looks.

What I really thought was interesting, was the "roll set" of the paper was totally eliminated after spraying. Maybe we don't need to use "d-rollers" to take the curl out! ;-) 

John Nollendorfs

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul" <roark.paul@...> wrote:

>
> "John" <jrnolly@> wrote:
> 
> > Just sprayed a print on Hawk Mountain Condor with the vinyl acrylic Rosco product, ... wagner HVLP gun. ...
> 
> What has stopped my experiments with the water-based sprays in the past include the need for a HVLP sprayer.  A quick search seems to indicate the Wagner HVLP units are much cheaper and maybe more practical than they used to be.  
> 
> I'd be real curious if this technology would allow an Eboni-6 print on Epson Hot Press paper (or Condor for that matter) to be coated in a manner that would protect it without glazing and also not cause the warmth to increase significantly.  That could be a significant step forward.
> 
> John, thanks for your posting on this matter.
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com
>

"John" <jrnolly@...> wrote:
>
> There was no change in the color of the print, only made them slightly richer looking...

With the heavy coats of the Premier Art water based coating I'm getting some warming and a large density increase.  


> 
> What I really thought was interesting, was the "roll set" of the paper was totally eliminated after spraying. ...


With the old Epson 3000 I used roll Archival Matte and laid the paper between 2 slightly dampened blotting papers.  The very high humidity seemed to "relax" the paper and take the curl out.  (For the 3000 that made the paper transport system work better.)

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com