Digital BW, The Print

glewis4457@... wrote:

>A couple of weeks ago the claim was that the two were identical and only the 
>name was changed due to concerns about the use of the term "Archival",
>
that's what we were all led to believe..  Even Harald Johnson said so on 
page 237 of  his definitive  new book (I am keeping Harald apprised of 
developments on this topic)..

> and 
>the logo dropped.  I challenged the writer, in a good manner, as to why they 
>would do that and why we should believe him.
>
1)  The reasons I and others have been given and passed on are still 
quite valid...

2) To quote Paul:


Paul Roark wrote:

>I also used the X-Rite to measure the front and back brightness of the new
>EAM and EEM.  With these samples, the EAM actually had a brighter front and
>back than the EEM -- just the opposite of what I'd seen comparing old EAM
>with EEM.  So, I'm guessing the change in formula, if any, occurred prior to
>the change in name, and there are sample differences that affect both.  I
>note also that outside the U.S. EAM is still, apparently, being sold.
>  
>

I'm beginning to seriously wonder if, as with their inks, they are now 
using multiple sources for the media substrate (prior to Mitsubishi 
adding the receptor coating)?  

Interestingly, if that is the case, curves could be very specific to 
market.  I.e: an American EEM curve might axiomatically not work in the 
UK or Asia if the initial source of substrate differs..  IF EPSON is 
doing something like this, given the recent addition of all the new 
EPSON branded papers to the North American market (not yet replicated 
elsewhere), then, as well as the differences we might expect to see 
between US market product and the product in other markets, I would bet 
that we will therefore see differences as well between "grey market" and 
TRUE North American market product (something I don't think would likely 
upset anyone at EPSON corporate).  This could mean one godawful mess for 
those trying to write universal profiles for EPSON printers using any 
specific EPSON media (something I am sure EPSON would understand would 
likely help keep down, to some degree,  the likelihood of users using 
alternative inksets).


Additionally, if there has been an actual formulaic change, then EEM 
could easily be the same as "new" EAM... but different from old EAM..  ugh!

>  he responded with quite a 
>resume and contacts within the Epson organization.  Now, we have this which 
>seems to claim that the two are very different.  
>
Not VERY different. But certainly there seem to be some significant 
variations...  Even batch to batch and within the  EAM/EEM format 
offerings... and they are substantial enough to raise significant 
concerns on several fronts.

Here's  a justifiable fear on my part..

Let's assume I created an EAM profile. It now may or may not be 
worthless with EEM..  Similarly, people have reported differences in 
whiteness, etc. between EEM in larger and smaller sizes..  Great, now, I 
have to profile for paper size?  Or could it be based upon the media 
source.. If so, how do I ensure I have media with the same 
specifications? Accordingly, how the heck can I profile at all -- is 
using EEM/EAM going to be akin to the way I learned to shoot chromes, 
"make sure they are all from the same batch/lot numbers"?  I'm not about 
to use a media that I have to profile by packet..  That defeats one of 
the key reproducibility benefits of going digital..

Now that we have something substantial it's time for me to approach 
EPSON's consumables people (assuming Paul and others have no problem 
with that) and ask them "what the hell is REALLY up?"  They may be 
unaware of much of this, as the pre-production substrate they get from 
contractors is probably all internal biz for the Keretsu in Japan 
(except for consumables like the Somerset Velvet, the new Fine Art 
papers made for them by Crane, and the new DuPont based media)..

>Now who should we believe 
>and why? FWIW, for me on my C80, EAM works the best of any paper I have 
>tried.
>  
>
Have you tried any EEM yet?

Jerry, contrary to my sometimes brusque manner, I really WANT to know 
what is up.  Certainly, I'm no apologist for EPSON. The only reason 
ANYONE puts up with my momentary flashes of attitude is that I'll 
tenaciously track down a problem that others are dealing with, 
regardless of what my own interests may be.. I briefly referenced my 
involvement in the whole 1270 mess some years back..  What I didn't 
mention is that I did all that without even owning a 1270 (I finally 
bought a refurb this year to use with the MIS pigs), the first 
orange-shift reports (from Carol Glasgow) hit LITERALLY as I was about 
to buy a 1270 the first Spring they were on sale in the US.. My umbrage 
at EPSON's less than up-front and forthright manner in its initial 
handling of the orange-shift is what involved me (I have a bit of Don 
Quixote in me).  


Jerry, another question, kinda off-topic: Do you use the C80 for any 
kind of non-photo printing?  I ask as I am considering that or a HP5550 
to replace my Mom's Lexmark.  I'd appreciate any insights you might have 
(especially on print speed for documents)..  
Keith

 

"Just some guy," and founder of the Multiverse's largest EPSON printer 
User Community (highly recommended by Vogon Poets and MegaDodo 
Publications), at:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EPSONx7x_Printers/
 
"For the rest of you out there, the secret is to bang the rocks together 
guys"

 


{ The P.O.V. Image Service Website is still at http://www.p-o-v-image.com/ }






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

Jerry,

When you compare EEM and EAM paper side by side, the EEM is whiter. I 
can't imagine ANYone not being able to
see the difference. It's quite noticeable.  As to the Logo, what can I 
say?  MINE does NOT have it. That too is quite
obvious to anybody who looks.  They can't therefore be IDENTICAL papers, 
can they?  Also, the blacks simply are
NOT as deep as the EAM paper. VERY close, but there's a difference. The 
EEM  and Eclipse Satine Bright White
paper seems to me to have identical blacks.


Jerry in ND

>>There is no
>>paper that doesn't flake that I've found except the Epson EAM. 
>>Unfortunately, they changed it, and now the black isn't as deep as the
>>old paper was. They now call it Enhanced matte, but they actually should
>>call it unenhanced matte.  It is whiter, and doesn't have the logo on
>>the back, but the blacks aren't as deep as before.  All other papers
>>I've used flake. Some MUCH worse than others.
>>
> 
> 
> A couple of weeks ago the claim was that the two were identical and only the 
> name was changed due to concerns about the use of the term "Archival", and 
> the logo dropped.  I challenged the writer, in a good manner, as to why they 
> would do that and why we should believe him.  he responded with quite a 
> resume and contacts within the Epson organization.  Now, we have this which 
> seems to claim that the two are very different.  Now who should we believe 
> and why? FWIW, for me on my C80, EAM works the best of any paper I have 
> tried.
> 
> Jerry in Houston
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> 
> 
> 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 "flames."
> - 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/ 
> 
> 
>

Jerry wrote:

>When you compare EEM and EAM paper side by side, the EEM is whiter. I
>can't imagine ANYone not being able to
>see the difference. It's quite noticeable.

Keith wrote:

>... if there has been an actual formulaic change, then EEM
>could easily be the same as "new" EAM... but different
>from old EAM..  ugh!

I think the changes in whiteness and dmax are beyond what one would expect
from a mere batch-to-batch or even supplier variation.  I would guess there
is a formula change.  And, with the new EAM I just received from Atlex, I'd
say that the formula change is for both.  If it is just variation among
batches and manufacturers, then Epson has a serious quality control issue.

If I were Epson, I would try to find a formula for the paper that helped me
with the Wilhelm testing.  (Did you notice the EEM tests are not done -- or,
perhaps more accurately, reported?  They may not be released until Epson
finds a "fix" for the yellowing problem that is sufficient to get decent
results.)

I also think the UC ink's huge pigment load may be an issue that calls for a
paper formula change.  The "waviness" I saw with the Matte Black was not
present with the newest EEM I have.  After all, the old EAM formula was
optimized for the Archival inks, and they have a pigment load half that of
the UC inks.

I must say, however, when I received the EAM boxes for Atlex I was really
hoping for the old stuff -- acid and all.  I really miss the high dmax of
the older paper.

Keith, good luck getting accurate information out of Epson employees.  I
find as many different stories as employees I talk to -- right up to the
chief of the U.S. Pro Graphics division.  Short of a high Epson official in
Japan, I doubt anyone knows what is going on, but they'll not hesitate to
tell you inaccurate information as if it were the absolute truth.

Paul
http://www.PaulRoark.com

Hi Keith,

No, I have not used any of the newer epson printers such as the C series.
I am mighty upset right now with epson products. I thought
that the old EAM paper was a paper you could always count on to at LEAST 
be the same paper every time I ordered
a bunch.  The EEM seems to be ok for color printing. I have my 1280 and 
Enhanced Generations 4 profiled for Satine Eclipse
paper, and the profile is very useable on the EAM and EEM papers.  There 
isn't much difference in the EEM and EAM
when printing in color, but in black and white, the lesser D max makes 
it nearly unacceptable.  There are many
Hahnemuhle papers that would be just great if they didn't flake so 
badly, especially Welle's River.

This flaking problem has been a headache for at least 6 years for 
Hahnemhule. Why in the hell haven't they fixed
the problem?  Even eclipse flakes badly, unless you really rub down the 
paper HARD before printing, with a soft
cloth.

How many of us would EVER put up with dollar+  a sheet silver 
photographic paper if you just handled the paper
normally and bits of silver began to flake off?  This is a real problem 
that should have been solved a long time ago!

The Torchon, (Royal Riviera), Photo Rag, Wells River, William Turner, 
German Etching, etc. have very acceptable
blacks, but they all flake.  And for the very high prices that are 
charged for these papers, this should NOT be
a problem.

Jerry
>

Having made prints on EEM and EAM, using the same profile, my local 
sharp-eyed panel agrees that the EAM black is noticeably blacker than the 
EEM. The difference isn't that great, but any reduction in maximum black is 
regrettable. Contrary to what others have observed, the EAM base on my 
sample appears whiter than the EEM. Again the difference isn't that great.

====================
V. Landweber
victor@...
phone (510)841-7217
====================

Hello Jerry,

>There isn't much difference in the EEM and EAM when 
>printing in color, but in black and white, the lesser 
>D max makes it nearly unacceptable.  

I use EAM for proofing because it's cheaper and looks very close to PR
which I use for final prints (BW).  If EEM moves too far away from PR
then I'll have to look for another proofing paper.  Is there anything
out there that might do the job, longevity not being an issue?

Regards,
Clayton

Clayton,  Legion photo matte, and possibly Aspen from media street, but
Aspen is a tad too thin. CD Tobie recommends the Dotworks line of
papers.  Then there is the Weber-Valentine line, and the Mitsubishi line,
but I don't remember mitsubishi or weber valentine having marvelous blacks.

Never tried Dot works, though.


Jerry

"Clayton Jones " wrote:

> 
> Hello Jerry,
> 
> >There isn't much difference in the EEM and EAM when
> >printing in color, but in black and white, the lesser
> >D max makes it nearly unacceptable.
> 
> I use EAM for proofing because it's cheaper and looks very close to PR
> which I use for final prints (BW).  If EEM moves too far away from PR
> then I'll have to look for another proofing paper.  Is there anything
> out there that might do the job, longevity not being an issue?
> 
> Regards,
> Clayton
> 
> 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 "flames."
> - 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/

Jerry Olson wrote:

 >Clayton,  Legion photo matte, and possibly Aspen from media street, but
 >Aspen is a tad too thin. CD Tobie recommends the Dotworks line of
 >papers.  Then there is the Weber-Valentine line, and the Mitsubishi line,
 >but I don't remember mitsubishi or weber valentine having marvelous 
blacks.
 >
 >
 >
 >

Of course, AFAIK, Mitsubishi does EPSON's proprietary coating and is the 
parent member of the Keretsu EPSON is part of, I would therefore, 
hesitate to go that route..

Keith



"Just some guy," and founder of the Multiverse's largest EPSON printer
User Community (highly recommended by Vogon Poets and MegaDodo
Publications), at:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EPSONx7x_Printers/

"For the rest of you out there, the secret is to bang the rocks together
guys"




{ The P.O.V. Image Service Website is still at http://www.p-o-v-image.com/ }