Yahoo Groups archive
Thread
2012-04-30 by Ernst Dinkla
Latest 140 Megalux hours Aardenburg Imaging test and EEF is going into red numbers; -1.6 Hahnem\ufffdhle Fine Art Baryta not that good either on paper whites. -- Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst Dinkla Grafische Techniek Quad, pi\ufffdzografie, gicl\ufffde www.pigment-print.com
2012-04-30 by Steve Kale
Ernst, remind me, what was the starting point for each? (I find it rather frustrating that with OS-X 10.7 and moving to i1Profiler I can no longer take a simple patch measurement.) On 30 Apr 2012, at 09:44, Ernst Dinkla wrote: > Latest 140 Megalux hours Aardenburg Imaging test and EEF is going into > red numbers; -1.6 Hahnemühle Fine Art Baryta not that good either > on paper whites. > > -- > Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst > > Dinkla Grafische Techniek > Quad, piëzografie, giclée > www.pigment-print.com > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
2012-04-30 by Ernst Dinkla
On 04/30/2012 12:10 PM, Steve Kale wrote: > Ernst, remind me, what was the starting point for each? (I find it > rather frustrating that with OS-X 10.7 and moving to i1Profiler I can no > longer take a simple patch measurement.) Steve this is the paper white shift in Aardenburg I* color unit, not a Lab number. It started at 100 dropped below 50 after 40 MH and is -1.6 at 140 MH. The Lab numbers: at the test start Lab 96 1.3 -5.0 and at 140 MH Lab 96.2 -0.3 5.0 more than 10 DeltaE shift at the b, as warm as Bamboo is when new. No fiber/baryta paper I measured is that warm when new. -- Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst Dinkla Grafische Techniek Quad, pi\ufffdzografie, gicl\ufffde www.pigment-print.com
2012-04-30 by Mark
--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Ernst Dinkla <e.dinkla@...> wrote: > > On 04/30/2012 12:10 PM, Steve Kale wrote: > > Ernst, remind me, what was the starting point for each? (I find it > > rather frustrating that with OS-X 10.7 and moving to i1Profiler I can no > > longer take a simple patch measurement.) > > > Steve this is the paper white shift in Aardenburg I* color unit, not a > Lab number. It started at 100 dropped below 50 after 40 MH and is -1.6 > at 140 MH. > > The Lab numbers: at the test start Lab 96 1.3 -5.0 and at 140 MH Lab > 96.2 -0.3 5.0 more than 10 DeltaE shift at the b, as warm as Bamboo is > when new. > No fiber/baryta paper I measured is that warm when new. Perhaps more importantly, the initial UVincluded-UVexcluded delta b* measurement was 6.5 for this sample (see the "UV delta b* Influence" category in the AaI&A database for these media whitepoint measurements). That value puts this sample in the high OBA category, but it also means that only delta b*= 6.5 out of the delta b*=10 at 140Mluxhr can be explained by OBA burnout. The fact that the delta E shift for the media white point has surpassed 6.5 (and as Ernst noted is now greater than delta E=10) means either that the OBA degradation products are not totally colorless, or there are other chemistries starting to discolor, or both. Exhibition Fiber paper has the dubious distinction to be the first paper in the AaI&A database that displays this phenomenon. Paper choice is a very subjective thing for most printmakers. There are numerous desired initial appearance properties to consider, and comprehensive information on print permanence is often hard to come by. That said, these surprising lightfastness test results for EEF should give digital FineArt printmakers some pause to reflect. best regards, Mark http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com
2012-04-30 by Paul
Epson's calling this paper "Exhibition Fiber" reminds me of the old "Archival Matte" name they slapped on their cheap, acidic paper. Paul www.PaulRoark.com
2012-04-30 by Steve Kale
I am more concerned with HPR Baryta, a paper I really do (otherwise) like. On 30 Apr 2012, at 16:29, Paul <roark.paul@...> wrote: Epson's calling this paper "Exhibition Fiber" reminds me of the old "Archival Matte" name they slapped on their cheap, acidic paper. Paul www.PaulRoark.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
2012-04-30 by Paul
Steve Kale <stevekale@...> wrote: > I am more concerned with HPR Baryta, a paper I really do (otherwise) like. Are there any non-OBA "glossy" or baryta-style papers besides Museo Silver Rag? Actually, I'm not anti-OBA if they are done "right" -- like, perhaps, just the right amount to offset the paper bleaching. HPR seems to have achieved that with Photo Rag. Paul www.PaulRoark.com
2012-04-30 by Terry Ritz
On 2012-04-30, at 11:19 AM, "Paul" <roark.paul@...> wrote: > Are there any non-OBA "glossy" or baryta-style papers besides Museo Silver Rag? Canson Platine. It's not a baryta-style paper but it is a fiber gloss paper. It has a very nice cotton rag base and a "soft gloss" coating with a subtle, regular stipple. Canson probably uses a similar agent (white pigment?) to what they use in Rag Photographique. The paper base has a Lab a around 0.2 and Lab b around 0.6, if memory serves correct. It would nicely complement Silver Rag, which is of course somewhat warmer. Terry.
2012-04-30 by Jim Goshorn
On Apr 30, 2012, at 1:19 PM, Paul wrote: > Are there any non-OBA "glossy" or baryta-style papers besides Museo Silver Rag? Hahnemuhle Photo Rag Baryta Canson Platine Jim
2012-04-30 by Paul
Ernst, > ... Aardenburg Imaging test ... > Hahnemühle Fine Art Baryta not that good either > on paper whites. Which http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com/ test report sample # were you looking at for this Hn. paper? Paul www.PaulRoark.com
2012-04-30 by Ernst Dinkla
Be aware that there are several Fiber/Baryta Satin/Gloss papers that show similar spectral plots to the Epson Exhibition Fiber. Moab, Innova, Pictorico brands. In SpectrumViz this EEF is called Epson Traditional Photo Paper, EU catalog naming. EEF is still distributed by Epson in the Signature Worthy category and the Digigraphie by Epson logo is often included on the same web page. BTW, almost all the printed colors were way better in testing. With other testing methods the paper white shift would not have been noticed I guess. Marks makes a good comment that there is more color shift than the OBAs fading to zero. This paper is not returning to a "Natural" color, whatever that is. -- Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst Dinkla Grafische Techniek Quad, pi\ufffdzografie, gicl\ufffde www.pigment-print.com
2012-04-30 by Ernst Dinkla
On 04/30/2012 08:18 PM, Paul wrote: > Ernst, > > > ... Aardenburg Imaging test ... > > Hahnem\ufffdhle Fine Art Baryta not that good either > > on paper whites. > > Which http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com/ test report sample # were you > looking at for this Hn. paper? > > Paul > www.PaulRoark.com Paul, Sample # AaI_20090726_SN005 -- Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst Dinkla Grafische Techniek Quad, pi\ufffdzografie, gicl\ufffde www.pigment-print.com
2012-04-30 by Mark
--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale <stevekale@...> wrote: > > I am more concerned with HPR Baryta, a paper I really do (otherwise) like. Ernst mentioned Hahnemulhe Fine Art Baryta, not to be confused with Hahnemuhle Photo Rag Baryta. Hahnemuhle reserves the term "rag" for cotton base paper. and rag is absent in the HN's naming convention for its alphacellulose base papers. So, Fine Art baryta is alphacellulose base and it also has considerable OBA. Ph Rag Baryta is cotton base and has no OBA. The HPR baryta with no OBA outperforms the HFA baryta in my testing. HPR baryta is an excellent choice for lightfastness and compatibility with the major OEM ink sets, HFA baryta not so much. best, Mark http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com
2012-04-30 by Phil
Is it possible to translate the test into something easily understandable. For example: In 3 months/6 months/1 year/3 year/10 years/30 years/100 years/300 years/1000 years, the prints with this paper using an Epson ink will yield into: no image change/10% fading/30%/50%/100% (no image)/paper disintegrate/etc. Thanks, Phil On 4/30/2012 7:10 AM, Ernst Dinkla wrote: > > On 04/30/2012 12:10 PM, Steve Kale wrote: > > Ernst, remind me, what was the starting point for each? (I find it > > rather frustrating that with OS-X 10.7 and moving to i1Profiler I can no > > longer take a simple patch measurement.) > > Steve this is the paper white shift in Aardenburg I* color unit, not a > Lab number. It started at 100 dropped below 50 after 40 MH and is -1.6 > at 140 MH. > > The Lab numbers: at the test start Lab 96 1.3 -5.0 and at 140 MH Lab > 96.2 -0.3 5.0 more than 10 DeltaE shift at the b, as warm as Bamboo is > when new. > No fiber/baryta paper I measured is that warm when new. > > -- > Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst > > Dinkla Grafische Techniek > Quad, piëzografie, giclée > www.pigment-print.com > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
2012-04-30 by Mark
--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Phil <panmedia@...> wrote: Re: [Digital BW] Epson Exhibition Fiber paper white shift at -1.6 > > Is it possible to translate the test into something easily > understandable. For example: > > In 3 months/6 months/1 year/3 year/10 years/30 years/100 years/300 > years/1000 years, the prints with this paper using an Epson ink will > yield into: > no image change/10% fading/30%/50%/100% (no image)/paper disintegrate/etc. > > Thanks, > Phil If you want a simple answer, here's one: Even the most lignin-filled, acid-loaded paper printed with the cheapest most fade prone litho inks can easily last over a century! That said, I didn't answer the question "what conditions allow this result?" nor did I answer the question "even though it may nominally be said to last that long, how bad will it look at that time?" Aye,t here's the rub!!!! We can keep the cheapest least durable printed photos for centuries if we take appropriate care to control dirt and dust, heat, humidity, light exposure, and attack by deleterious gas pollutants, and if we allow some noticeable deterioration that doesn't impair the legible interpretation of the information content (this factor must be quantified). The devil is in defining "how much change is too much change". IMHO, the industry had good intentions but very flawed reasoning when it started to report print permanence ratings expressed in normalized "years on display". I wish this neat little soundbite worked, but the premise is entirely flawed and was so from the start. Your personal environment (even within the same home) where you display prints has up to three orders of magnitude impact on light fading rates alone under "typical" real-world conditions not to mention other pathways for deterioration caused by degrading gas exposure, heat, and humidity levels that can occur in real-world indoor storage and display environments. In other words, if someone declares a print will last 25 years on display within some limit for allowed fading it might actually go 250 years or less 2.5 years to reach that allowed level of change. The print owner needs to weigh in with an assessment of heat, humidity, and light levels. No laboratory can do this for you. This is why AaI&A reports Megalux hours of allowable light exposure exposure dose in its light fastness studies, not "years on display" at some assumed light level that could be wrong by two or three orders of magnitude in the real world. You have two options. 1) don't worry about print permanence because it's complicated, or 2) take some time to learn how to interpret test results like those offered by AaI&A. I don't mean that to sound harsh or sarcastic. I offer this advice with the good intention to move the typical forum discussion on print longevity up a notch to something a little more self-enlightened. best, Mark http:/www.aardenburg-imaging.com
2012-05-01 by Steve Kale
Ah excellent. I didn't read his comment carefully enough. I am using Hahnemuehle Photorag Baryta at the moment. On 30 Apr 2012, at 20:27, Mark wrote: > > > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale <stevekale@...> wrote: > > > > I am more concerned with HPR Baryta, a paper I really do (otherwise) like. > > Ernst mentioned Hahnemulhe Fine Art Baryta, not to be confused with Hahnemuhle Photo Rag Baryta. Hahnemuhle reserves the term "rag" for cotton base paper. and rag is absent in the HN's naming convention for its alphacellulose base papers. So, Fine Art baryta is alphacellulose base and it also has considerable OBA. Ph Rag Baryta is cotton base and has no OBA. The HPR baryta with no OBA outperforms the HFA baryta in my testing. HPR baryta is an excellent choice for lightfastness and compatibility with the major OEM ink sets, HFA baryta not so much. > > best, > Mark > http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]