Digital BW, The Print

Well after waiting two weeks for my shipment of letter size Epson Archival
Matte paper, I discovered today that the place I ordered it from (Systems
Unlimited) has gone under. They didn't charge me at least.

Let's see if I can make this work to my advantage.

Does anybody know where to obtain letter size EAM that does not have the
watermark logo and arrows on the back?

Todd

Todd,

What arrows and logo? I have gotten all mine from Epson's on-line 
store and I have never seen anything on the back.

Martin

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., tflash <tflash@e...> wrote:
> Well after waiting two weeks for my shipment of letter size Epson 
Archival
> Matte paper, I discovered today that the place I ordered it from 
(Systems
> Unlimited) has gone under. They didn't charge me at least.
> 
> Let's see if I can make this work to my advantage.
> 
> Does anybody know where to obtain letter size EAM that does not 
have the

> watermark logo and arrows on the back?
> 
> Todd

You talking letter size? When was the last time you purchased? I would have
said you were overpaying, but if you are getting it without the nonsense,
maybe not.

A couple of months back Epson, in their infinite wisdom, had decided to
decorated the back of their prints with their name and arrows running down
the long direction of the back of each sheet. If the Strathmore watermark
could be called elegant on their cotton writing papers, the Epson
"watermark" could be called schlock.

You are blessed not to know of what I speak.

However, due to customer pressure Epson said they would remove the watermark
in future releases, but I didn't think we were supposed to get clean stock
for a few more months. I don't know if you got old stuff or new. The Matte
Heavyweight never got the marks (I don't think), you sure you don't have
that?

Todd

> Todd,
> 
> What arrows and logo? I have gotten all mine from Epson's on-line
> store and I have never seen anything on the back.
> 
> Martin
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., tflash <tflash@e...> wrote:
>> Well after waiting two weeks for my shipment of letter size Epson
> Archival
>> Matte paper, I discovered today that the place I ordered it from
> (Systems
>> Unlimited) has gone under. They didn't charge me at least.
>> 
>> Let's see if I can make this work to my advantage.
>> 
>> Does anybody know where to obtain letter size EAM that does not
> have the
>> watermark logo and arrows on the back?
>> 
>> Todd

http://www.atlex.com is the cheapest place to get original epson supplies.
You could ask them before you buy if the watermark is on the back. I believe
epson has removed it.

Jerry



mwesley250@... wrote:

> Todd,
>
> What arrows and logo? I have gotten all mine from Epson's on-line
> store and I have never seen anything on the back.
>
> Martin
>
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., tflash <tflash@e...> wrote:
> > Well after waiting two weeks for my shipment of letter size Epson
> Archival
> > Matte paper, I discovered today that the place I ordered it from
> (Systems
> > Unlimited) has gone under. They didn't charge me at least.
> >
> > Let's see if I can make this work to my advantage.
> >
> > Does anybody know where to obtain letter size EAM that does not
> have the
> > watermark logo and arrows on the back?
> >
> > Todd
>
>
> If you do not wish to belong to Digital B&W, The Print, you may
> unsubscribe by sending an email to:
> DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Todd,

It was letter size but I bought a whole bunch a couple of months back 
so it might not be representative of what's currently available.

I actually wouldn't mind sometime on the back to make it easier to 
quickly indentify the printing side but obviously very discreet and 
tasteful would be nice, i.e. don't put the marketing department n 
charge.

Martin


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., tflash <tflash@e...> wrote:
> You talking letter size? When was the last time you purchased? I 
would have
> said you were overpaying, but if you are getting it without the 
nonsense,
> maybe not.
> 
> A couple of months back Epson, in their infinite wisdom, had 
decided to
> decorated the back of their prints with their name and arrows 
running down
> the long direction of the back of each sheet. If the Strathmore 
watermark
> could be called elegant on their cotton writing papers, the Epson
> "watermark" could be called schlock.
> 
> You are blessed not to know of what I speak.
> 
> However, due to customer pressure Epson said they would remove the 
watermark
> in future releases, but I didn't think we were supposed to get 
clean stock
> for a few more months. I don't know if you got old stuff or new. 
The Matte
> Heavyweight never got the marks (I don't think), you sure you don't 
have
> that?
> 
> Todd
> 
(snip earlier)

Todd,

take a look at the paper database (prices per each letter-size sheet):

Epson Archival Matte = 192 gsm  and  $0.23 at Atlantic Exchange
ConeTech Matte = 170 gsm and $ 0.60 at inkjet mall
Lyson Photo Matte = 170 gsm and $0.30 at inkjetart.com

Conclusions from the above:

-Epson is by far the cheapest proofing paper around. I use it in volume and 
pass it around as free samples, pin it up and otherwise use it like laser paper. 
Don't care what it says on the back (though that's too bad). Like the look.

- Jon Cone claims that Conetech matte is archival and has no color shifting 
problems. He recommends against Epson AM and in favor of CT matte.

- If you want a lighter (and whiter) sheet with good dmax (1.63), you can either 
spend $.60 at inkjetmall or $.30 at inkjetart. Your choice....

Antonis

(Caveat: prices may have changed since the data was put in - always check 
for current figures)




--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., tflash <tflash@e...> wrote:

> Well after waiting two weeks for my shipment of letter size Epson Archival
> Matte paper, I discovered today that the place I ordered it from (Systems
> Unlimited) has gone under. They didn't charge me at least.
> 
> Let's see if I can make this work to my advantage.
> 
> Does anybody know where to obtain letter size EAM that does not have the
> watermark logo and arrows on the back?
> 
> Todd

Antonis,

Aren't the ConeTech Matte and the Lyson Photo Matte rebranded 
Hahnemule Photo Matte? I have tested the ConeTech Matte and the 
Lumijet Soft Suede (also H. Photo Matte I believe).

They are very close to EAM but not as stiff. Unfortunately they both 
failed the pH pen test and gave readings similiar to EAM. Steadman 
reported the same.

Their claim to being archival is no better than Epson's.

Martin

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., antonisphoto@y... wrote:
> Todd,
> 
> take a look at the paper database (prices per each letter-size 
sheet):
> 
> Epson Archival Matte = 192 gsm  and  $0.23 at Atlantic Exchange
> ConeTech Matte = 170 gsm and $ 0.60 at inkjet mall
> Lyson Photo Matte = 170 gsm and $0.30 at inkjetart.com
> 
> Conclusions from the above:
> 
> -Epson is by far the cheapest proofing paper around. I use it in 
volume and 
> pass it around as free samples, pin it up and otherwise use it like 
laser paper. 
> Don't care what it says on the back (though that's too bad). Like 
the look.
> 
> - Jon Cone claims that Conetech matte is archival and has no color 
shifting 
> problems. He recommends against Epson AM and in favor of CT matte.
> 
> - If you want a lighter (and whiter) sheet with good dmax (1.63), 
you can either 
> spend $.60 at inkjetmall or $.30 at inkjetart. Your choice....
> 
> Antonis
> 
> (Caveat: prices may have changed since the data was put in - always 
check 
> for current figures)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., tflash <tflash@e...> 
wrote:
> > Well after waiting two weeks for my shipment of letter size Epson 
Archival
> > Matte paper, I discovered today that the place I ordered it from 
(Systems
> > Unlimited) has gone under. They didn't charge me at least.
> > 
> > Let's see if I can make this work to my advantage.
> > 
> > Does anybody know where to obtain letter size EAM that does not 
have the

> > watermark logo and arrows on the back?
> > 
> > Todd

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., mwesley250@e... wrote:
> Antonis,
> 
> Aren't the ConeTech Matte and the Lyson Photo Matte rebranded 
> Hahnemule Photo Matte?


Yes, they are as far as I know. They look the same and weigh the same.

> 
> They are very close to EAM but not as stiff. Unfortunately they both 
> failed the pH pen test and gave readings similiar to EAM. Steadman 
> reported the same.
> 
> Their claim to being archival is no better than Epson's.


This had been debated at the piezo list and Jon said something to the effect 
that they had seen no problems with ct matte either fading or shifting to green. 
This may or may not relate to the surface acidity that the pens test. I have no 
data of my own on this - other than the fact that I did the same pen tests and 
got the same results as everyone else, hence I concur on the acidity issue.

For the rest, to me, Epson has killed EAM from being a candidate for "final 
print" status. It's just cheap paper with good black. I don't expect more of it.



Antonis

>> Aren't the ConeTech Matte and the Lyson Photo Matte rebranded
>> Hahnemule Photo Matte?

I don't particularly like the base color of these papers. I guess it's from
optical brighteners, but they seem to have a slight lavender cast to my eye.

Todd

> 
> 
> Yes, they are as far as I know. They look the same and weigh the same.
> 
>> 
>> They are very close to EAM but not as stiff. Unfortunately they both
>> failed the pH pen test and gave readings similiar to EAM. Steadman
>> reported the same.
>> 
>> Their claim to being archival is no better than Epson's.
> 
> 
> This had been debated at the piezo list and Jon said something to the effect
> that they had seen no problems with ct matte either fading or shifting to
> green. 
> This may or may not relate to the surface acidity that the pens test. I have
> no 
> data of my own on this - other than the fact that I did the same pen tests and
> got the same results as everyone else, hence I concur on the acidity issue.
> 
> For the rest, to me, Epson has killed EAM from being a candidate for "final
> print" status. It's just cheap paper with good black. I don't expect more of
> it.
> 
> 
> 
> Antonis

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., tflash <tflash@e...> wrote:

> >> Aren't the ConeTech Matte and the Lyson Photo Matte rebranded
> >> Hahnemule Photo Matte?
> 
> I don't particularly like the base color of these papers. I guess it's from
> optical brighteners, but they seem to have a slight lavender cast to my eye.
> 
> Todd

Agreed. That and the lighter weight doesn't justify paying more than the 
Epson. Do you have a better option for proof prints (at EAM cost)?


Antonis

on 8/2/01 10:46 PM, antonisphoto@... wrote:

> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., tflash <tflash@e...> wrote:
> 
>>>> Aren't the ConeTech Matte and the Lyson Photo Matte rebranded
>>>> Hahnemule Photo Matte?
>> 
>> I don't particularly like the base color of these papers. I guess it's from
>> optical brighteners, but they seem to have a slight lavender cast to my eye.
>> 
>> Todd
> 
> Agreed. That and the lighter weight doesn't justify paying more than the
> Epson. Do you have a better option for proof prints (at EAM cost)?


Not at all. The EAM, or even Epson Matte Heavyweight, are just perfect for
proofs. And if you use a textured paper like Torchon, the Epson Watercolor
Paper is a great proofing paper, but it only comes in 13x19" sheets (or
perhaps rolls). Even at 13x19, I paid a buck a sheet; one could cut it down
if they wanted too.

Todd

At the moment I like the EAM for proofing but I will probably try the 
HWM when my current supply of EAM runs out. Although the price 
difference seems very small.

I could live with the brightners in the H. Photo Matte (aka becoming 
infinite.) but see no reason to pay extra.

With the Piezo software drivers it seems to be pretty easy to go from 
EAM with the Epson Photo Profile to a Turner or German Etching with 
the Orwell Profile and only have to do some minor tweaks.

Todd, you are using Paul Roark's inks and workflows. Do you have to 
do much adjustment when you switch from EAM to an art paper?

Martin

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., tflash <tflash@e...> wrote:
> on 8/2/01 10:46 PM, antonisphoto@y... wrote:
> 
> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., tflash <tflash@e...> 
wrote:
> > 
> >>>> Aren't the ConeTech Matte and the Lyson Photo Matte rebranded
> >>>> Hahnemule Photo Matte?
> >> 
> >> I don't particularly like the base color of these papers. I 
guess it's from
> >> optical brighteners, but they seem to have a slight lavender 
cast to my eye.
> >> 
> >> Todd
> > 
> > Agreed. That and the lighter weight doesn't justify paying more 
than the
> > Epson. Do you have a better option for proof prints (at EAM cost)?
> 
> 
> Not at all. The EAM, or even Epson Matte Heavyweight, are just 
perfect for
> proofs. And if you use a textured paper like Torchon, the Epson 
Watercolor
> Paper is a great proofing paper, but it only comes in 13x19" sheets 
(or
> perhaps rolls). Even at 13x19, I paid a buck a sheet; one could cut 
it down

> if they wanted too.
> 
> Todd

> Todd, you are using Paul Roark's inks and workflows. Do you have to
> do much adjustment when you switch from EAM to an art paper?
> 
> Martin


Well, it depends. I haven't tried as many as I'd like. I think they all have
different dot gains, but some more than others. The Hawk Mountain papers all
(I gave up trying after 3) printed dark and muddy and weak. There would be
no cure. Somerset Enhanced was 10-20% darker, Epson Watercolor was close,
and the Hahnamuhle papers were perhaps a tad darker, but mostly just felt
richer, Museo very close to EAM, as was Concord Rag. Hey that's not so few!
Unfortunately all were from skimpy sample packs, so I can't say I've really
gotten to know any of them. But I'd say short of the Hawk Mountain papers,
all were a simple adjustment layer curve tweak away. Usually just raising
the middle point of the master curve (er, remember with Roark's curves you
need to work in RGB, at least in the end when you add his curve sets, as
they are what affects hue.)

Paul's hope is with his open system, and possibly through the auspices of
MIS's site, users can trade curves, or transfer functions, for different
papers. I've messed with split tone prints, as it was an effect I worked
with in the darkroom too. On silver paper, I'd put a strong dose of
benzatroizle (sp?) in a neutral/cold tone developer, which on Mitsubishi
paper had the highlights be a tad cool (much like Oriental Seagull in finish
and appearance - both Japanese). Then I'd selenium tone the blacks to a warm
eggplant. The net effect was a subtle split along a cyan (highlights)/red
(shadows) axis. With Paul's setup the axis is more yellow/blue. But you can
use either color for the shadow or highlight, and can better place the
crossover points of the hue shifts. I worked out my methodology (well, a
couple) but I think I'm just preferring neutral right now.

Did I have a point?  Oh, it's flexible.

If you are switching profiles and tweaking, I'd say it's about the same
amount of work I'm doing. I just eyeball the gamma on the print, and pull a
curve, but I bet Paul or some others might compare step wedges, and device
more precise curves or transfer functions. Once these are developed they can
be emailed among users and loaded into Photoshop.

Sorry, for the ramble. Let me take another hack at the question.

A little.

Todd