Digital BW, The Print

It is not possible to get a brighter white than the paper it is printed on!

> 1. With a quad or hextone inkset how does one get bright whites in a print, a white brighter than the whiteness of the paper it is printed on?   All the inks are shades of black, so how can one get a white that is brighter than the paper printed on?

The paper itself it the white.

> 2. What is a good archival paper that is whiter than the Epson archival matte paper?

Legion Photo Matte and Eclipse Satine Bright White
 
> 3. Is there any metamerism using MIS quad or hextone inks on Epson archival matter paper?   Note: Using MIS color inks, I don't see metamerism on Epson archival matte paper.  I only see the metamerism if I print on a glossy paper?

Very Little metamerism with MIS Hex or Quad inks.

Jerry

The new Red River Premium Matte is also a bright white and prints similarly
to EAM.  It is available in a 76lb (285gm) weight which I really like for
good quality...but perhaps not archival prints.  Its also available in
lighter weights as well and is priced competitively with EAM.

Robert

On 12/17/02 2:57 PM, "Jerry Olson" <jerryolson@...> wrote:

> It is not possible to get a brighter white than the paper it is printed on!
> 
>> 1. With a quad or hextone inkset how does one get bright whites in a print, a
>> white brighter than the whiteness of the paper it is printed on?   All the
>> inks are shades of black, so how can one get a white that is brighter than
>> the paper printed on?
> 
> The paper itself it the white.
> 
>> 2. What is a good archival paper that is whiter than the Epson archival matte
>> paper?
> 
> Legion Photo Matte and Eclipse Satine Bright White
> 
>> 3. Is there any metamerism using MIS quad or hextone inks on Epson archival
>> matter paper?   Note: Using MIS color inks, I don't see metamerism on Epson
>> archival matte paper.  I only see the metamerism if I print on a glossy
>> paper?
> 
> Very Little metamerism with MIS Hex or Quad inks.
> 
> Jerry
> 
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and other
> resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
> 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
> 
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to
> unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same
> page.
> 
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - Include your full name with your message.
> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep
> them short.
> - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or
> &amp;amp;quot;flames.&amp;amp;quot;
> - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various
> resources on the homepage.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> 
> 
>

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Robert Morrison <rmorrison@p...> wrote:
> The new Red River Premium Matte is also a bright white and prints similarly
> to EAM.  It is available in a 76lb (285gm) weight which I really like for
> good quality...but perhaps not archival prints.  Its also available in
> lighter weights as well and is priced competitively with EAM.
> 
> Robert

By any chance, have you tried printing w/the Piezo driver w/, I assume, the EAM profile?  If so, it would be a nice alternative to EAM which has a watermark on the back of it.

Thanks,
Dave G.

On 12/17/02 4:31 PM, "dgabbe2001 <dgabbe@...>"
<dgabbe@...> wrote:

> By any chance, have you tried printing w/the Piezo driver w/, I assume, the
> EAM profile?  If so, it would be a nice alternative to EAM which has a
> watermark on the back of it.
> 
> Thanks,
> Dave G.

No, I haven't  used the piezo driver for about the last 9 months...don't
know how it work.

Robert

> The new Red River Premium Matte is also a bright white and prints 
similarly
> to EAM.  It is available in a 76lb (285gm) weight which I really 
like for
> good quality...but perhaps not archival prints.  Its also available 
in
> lighter weights as well and is priced competitively with EAM.

I've received an order of the 48 lb. bright white and the paper has a 
faint lillac tint where as the samples of the 76 lb. do look bright 
white. I've printed on the 48 lb. and found that the shadows have a 
bit more detail than EAM but the high highlights seem to blow where 
on EAM the detail is held. 

I've yet to print on the 76 lb. sample. I would really like for this 
paper to work since it can be ordered in panoramic size (13x38) in 
small packs. How does the 76 lb. version compare to EAM? Anyone?

Don Bryant

>
>I've received an order of the 48 lb. bright white and the paper has a
>faint lillac tint where as the samples of the 76 lb. do look bright
>white. I've printed on the 48 lb. and found that the shadows have a
>bit more detail than EAM but the high highlights seem to blow where
>on EAM the detail is held.


I've been printing with an 1160 and G4 inks on Red River Premium Matte 47 
lb recently.  This may not be the same surface as the 48lb stock reported 
elsewhere.

While I love the wide format, I'm finding that the paper reproduces much 
less contrast than EAM.  The paper has similar white characteristics, but 
the blacks are miles away from EAM in density.  If you examine the printed 
surface at the right angle, you can easily see the surface of the paper, 
whereas with EAM, it's just a black void.

It's an unscientific evaluation, I agree, but to my eye there's no 
comparison.  Again, this may be a different surface than the 48lb "new" stock.

regards,

Peter

Peter,

> >I've received an order of the 48 lb. bright white and the paper 
has a
> >faint lillac tint where as the samples of the 76 lb. do look bright
> >white. I've printed on the 48 lb. and found that the shadows have a
> >bit more detail than EAM but the high highlights seem to blow where
> >on EAM the detail is held.
> 
> 
> I've been printing with an 1160 and G4 inks on Red River Premium 
Matte 47 
> lb recently.  This may not be the same surface as the 48lb stock 
reported 
> elsewhere.
> 
> While I love the wide format, I'm finding that the paper reproduces 
much 
> less contrast than EAM.  The paper has similar white 
characteristics, but 
> the blacks are miles away from EAM in density.  If you examine the 
printed 
> surface at the right angle, you can easily see the surface of the 
paper, 
> whereas with EAM, it's just a black void.
> 
> It's an unscientific evaluation, I agree, but to my eye there's no 
> comparison.  Again, this may be a different surface than the 
48lb "new" stock.

I menat 47 lb matt not 48. At anyrate my observations agree with 
yours. The overall contrast is less than EAM and blacks just don't 
appear as dense. However one can see more detail in the deep shadows.

Thanks,

Don Bryant