Digital BW, The Print

H group

I'm currently using the 2200 with ultrachrome inks (pk) and 
ImagePrint. I print both to epson premium luster and to somerset. 
While I like the quality and "depth" of black better on the luster 
than on the somerset, I dislike the bronzing. Which is probably why 
so many use the matte papers for B/W! 
What recommendations do people in this group have for papers that 
produce great B/W?

Thanks

> What recommendations do people in this group have for papers that 
> produce great B/W?

I use an Epson 2200 as well.
For my "everyday" printing I use Epson Enhanced Matte and for finished display prints I've 
just started using Moab Entrada Natural and I'm really liking the results. Both of these 
papers are obviously used with the matte black ink.

Michael

Thanks, Michael.  To continue the converstion here, what really 
frustrates me is the problem I get with "bronzing"  I just ran a b/w 
print on some old Ilford paper using the pk black pro glossy profile 
with IP, and the bronzing was greatly reduced. This leads me to want 
to continue the search for a paper and/or ink setting that will be 
free of bronzing. Has anyone tried tweaking the ink reduction 
settings in Ip to achieve this?

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "johnmuir.geo" 
<johnmuir.geo@y...> wrote:
> Thanks, Michael.  To continue the converstion here, what really 
> frustrates me is the problem I get with "bronzing"  I just ran a 
b/w 
> print on some old Ilford paper using the pk black pro glossy 
profile 
> with IP, and the bronzing was greatly reduced. This leads me to 
want 
> to continue the search for a paper and/or ink setting that will be 
> free of bronzing. Has anyone tried tweaking the ink reduction 
> settings in Ip to achieve this?


An inherent problem with pigments I'm afraid.  The particles are not 
absorbed into the paper structure as dyes are and this gives a 
differential between areas that are covered in pigment 'particles' 
and those that are not.  Some papers are affected more than others, 
Epson premium glossy seems to be a favourite. 
Other than that, your options are either to remove the differential, 
by coating the whole print with a clear base (in much the same way as 
the new R800 series printers use a glossy optimiser to cover the 
unprinted areas of the image with a clear laquer) - there are 
numerous options and posts on this here on the forum or laminating.
There also sound like some interesting developments in the new 
Futures Dye inks (colour set and mono set in the wings I understand), 
these are cited to have excellent fade resistance compared to other 
dyes (though how this will really bare out for us pigment archival 
die hards is another matter) and should not experience the bronzing 
problems.  I can't wait to see these in a printer.

regards
Steve

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "johnmuir.geo" 
<johnmuir.geo@y...> wrote:
> H group
> 
> I'm currently using the 2200 with ultrachrome inks (pk) and 
> ImagePrint. I print both to epson premium luster and to somerset. 
> While I like the quality and "depth" of black better on the luster 
> than on the somerset, I dislike the bronzing. Which is probably 
why 
> so many use the matte papers for B/W! 
> What recommendations do people in this group have for papers that 
> produce great B/W?
> 
> Thanks

Steve;

Some of the other responses pretty much cover this problem-matte K 
and rag paper is the way most of us do the B&W printing. If you need 
to keep using the Photo K ink for now, though, I've discovered that 
Oriental Graphica Lustre does a much better job with the UC inks. 
The gamut and D-max are better, with no visible 'veiling' and 
bronzing that the Epson papers show. The surface of the paper is a 
bit unusual though- it looks matte with no ink on it, but acquires a 
little shine after printing, with a very fine 'sandy', and less less 
structured texture to it. 
B&H carries it, all the way up to 44" wide.

Steve Karafyllakis

http:www.stevekphoto.com

Hello all,

I've been reading about the "bronzing" issue on glossy papers when 
BW images are printed on them. I wonder how many people view an 
image in light that produces the effect. If I am looking at an image 
and there is a glare on it, I simply turn the paper so the glare 
goes away and look at the image for what it speaks to me. The 
bronzing is not anything that detracts from an image for me. I 
reminds me of people who take out a loupe to examine a Black Only 
printed image. Those folks are not looking at the image as a whole, 
but are trying to find fault with it. Their insecurity forces them 
to dominate others with their criticism.

soap box mode off----

Your friend in Photography,

Johnny Eades

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Johnny Eades" 
<jeades1@s...> wrote:
> Hello all,
> 
> I've been reading about the "bronzing" issue on glossy papers when 
> BW images are printed on them. I wonder how many people view an 
> image in light that produces the effect. If I am looking at an 
image 
> and there is a glare on it, I simply turn the paper so the glare 
> goes away and look at the image for what it speaks to me. The 
> bronzing is not anything that detracts from an image for me. I 
> reminds me of people who take out a loupe to examine a Black Only 
> printed image. Those folks are not looking at the image as a whole, 
> but are trying to find fault with it. Their insecurity forces them 
> to dominate others with their criticism.
> 
> soap box mode off----
> 
> Your friend in Photography,
> 
> Johnny Eades

Hi Johnny, I agree with some of what you say, but must also take 
issue with some.  I personnaly do not have a major issue with 
bronzing, I think prints look nicer without, but hey, the technology 
is still developing - give it another year.
The problem comes if you are marketing / selling these prints.  I am 
not trying to pull the wool over anyones eyes, but give them a good 
dye print, no bronzing, and people don't bat an eyelid as to it's 
origins.  Half the time I have presented lustre or glossy pigment 
prints I get "wait a minute, is this an inkjet print?" then I have to 
go through the whole spiel of convincing them that it is different to 
the cr*p they get off their cheap home printers etc etc.  They notice 
this because of the bronzing, it is an issue, coat the prints and no-
one says a thing, except for the occaisional wow!

Steve

Hello all,

I can understand that. If we could only educate the general public 
who can't apreciate all the blood, sweat and tears that goes into 
producing a good print.

Your friend in Photography,

Johnny



--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "scrber" 
<stephen.bate@m...> wrote:
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Johnny 
Eades" 
> <jeades1@s...> wrote:
> > Hello all,
> > 
> > I've been reading about the "bronzing" issue on glossy papers 
when 
> > BW images are printed on them. I wonder how many people view an 
> > image in light that produces the effect. If I am looking at an 
> image 
> > and there is a glare on it, I simply turn the paper so the glare 
> > goes away and look at the image for what it speaks to me. The 
> > bronzing is not anything that detracts from an image for me. I 
> > reminds me of people who take out a loupe to examine a Black 
Only 
> > printed image. Those folks are not looking at the image as a 
whole, 
> > but are trying to find fault with it. Their insecurity forces 
them 
> > to dominate others with their criticism.
> > 
> > soap box mode off----
> > 
> > Your friend in Photography,
> > 
> > Johnny Eades
> 
> Hi Johnny, I agree with some of what you say, but must also take 
> issue with some.  I personnaly do not have a major issue with 
> bronzing, I think prints look nicer without, but hey, the 
technology 
> is still developing - give it another year.
> The problem comes if you are marketing / selling these prints.  I 
am 
> not trying to pull the wool over anyones eyes, but give them a 
good 
> dye print, no bronzing, and people don't bat an eyelid as to it's 
> origins.  Half the time I have presented lustre or glossy pigment 
> prints I get "wait a minute, is this an inkjet print?" then I have 
to 
> go through the whole spiel of convincing them that it is different 
to 
> the cr*p they get off their cheap home printers etc etc.  They 
notice 
> this because of the bronzing, it is an issue, coat the prints and 
no-

> one says a thing, except for the occaisional wow!
> 
> Steve

I'm afraid that's a lost battle! With the proliferation of cheap
digital printing and image taking, everybody, far more than before,
is a "photographer" if they know how to select "Auto" on their camera
[which comes probably preset anyway].

Photographers don't really like and are not themselves prepared to do
"customer education" kind of work. They are mostly inclined to spend
time with the creative process, and leave the rest, including sales,
marketing, client education, to others. The reality is though that
most of these type of photographers are not succeeding in business,
but those who have or acquire these "other" skills are faring much
better.

If you want to handle all these sales related issues by yourself, you
need first of all to educate yourself. Then, if you have the time and
expertise, you will probably spend some time trying to educate your
potential buyers. 
Potential buyers are of many hats too, including those who educate
themselves, or those who simply listen to what a "qualified" seller
will tell them [gallery owners, etc.].

Finally this issue is not new by any means. It exists since
photography was invented, only that it is more acute lately with a
growing number of photographers available vying for the same
potential buyers market.

Ara G.


--- Johnny Eades <jeades1@...> wrote:
>  Hello all,
> 
> I can understand that. If we could only educate the general public 
> who can't apreciate all the blood, sweat and tears that goes into 
> producing a good print.
> 
> Your friend in Photography,
> 
> Johnny
> 
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "scrber" 
> <stephen.bate@m...> wrote:
> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Johnny 
> Eades" 
> > <jeades1@s...> wrote:
> > > Hello all,
> > > 
> > > I've been reading about the "bronzing" issue on glossy papers 
> when 
> > > BW images are printed on them. I wonder how many people view an
> 
> > > image in light that produces the effect. 


	
		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Ara 
<rovision@y...> wrote:
> I'm afraid that's a lost battle! With the proliferation of cheap
> digital printing and image taking, everybody, far more than before,
> is a "photographer" if they know how to select "Auto" on their 
camera
> [which comes probably preset anyway].
> 
> Photographers don't really like and are not themselves prepared to 
do
> "customer education" kind of work. They are mostly inclined to 
spend
> time with the creative process, and leave the rest, including 
sales,
> marketing, client education, to others. The reality is though that
> most of these type of photographers are not succeeding in business,
> but those who have or acquire these "other" skills are faring much
> better.
> 
> If you want to handle all these sales related issues by yourself, 
you
> need first of all to educate yourself. Then, if you have the time 
and
> expertise, you will probably spend some time trying to educate your
> potential buyers. 
> Potential buyers are of many hats too, including those who educate
> themselves, or those who simply listen to what a "qualified" seller
> will tell them [gallery owners, etc.].
> 
> Finally this issue is not new by any means. It exists since
> photography was invented, only that it is more acute lately with a
> growing number of photographers available vying for the same
> potential buyers market.
> 
> Ara G.
> 


Amen, you got it - that is the big problem and one that will only 
get more difficult to overcome, hence the 'giclee' term and the 
recent discussion here on carbon pigment printing etc.  We are 
trying, legitimately so, to get away from "well I could have done 
that at home on my lexmark - and inkejt prints fade after a few 
weeks" group that is proliferating our market.  
.....and back to the original issue, Bronzing AND outgassing for 
that matter, affect what we do VISUALLY and that presents ammunition 
(for want of a better term) that goes against all that we try to 
promote in our wares and our methods/skills.

Steve

>>... what really frustrates me is the problem I get with "bronzing" ...

>An inherent problem with pigments I'm afraid.  The particles are not 
>absorbed into the paper structure ...

I don't think bronzing is an inherent problem with pigments.  The UT2 and
UT7 inks do not bronze on, for example, Epson Glossy Photo Paper or the
relatively archival version of this, Epson Glossy Paper Heavyweight (just in
rolls, unfortunately).

The problem from my perspective is the micro porous papers.  These papers
are great for getting the highest gamut from the color inksets, but for B&W
they have a serious bronzing problem.  I wish some company would make a
modern, thicker, archival paper with the older surface, but we are probably
too small a market to bother.  For those using UT inks, however, the Epson
Glossy Photo paper is a real bargain.  (UltraChrome technology does not work
well on the paper -- very weak dmax.)

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com 

For UT2 & UT7 information, curves, and settings see:
http://home1.gte.net/res09aij/

Frame it with glass and or spray it and they don't have to be educated???

:))

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Johnny Eades" <jeades1@s...> 
wrote:

>  Hello all,
> 
> I can understand that. If we could only educate the general public 
> who can't apreciate all the blood, sweat and tears that goes into 
> producing a good print.
> 
> Your friend in Photography,
> 
> Johnny
> 
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "scrber" 
> <stephen.bate@m...> wrote:
> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Johnny 
> Eades" 
> > <jeades1@s...> wrote:
> > > Hello all,
> > > 
> > > I've been reading about the "bronzing" issue on glossy papers 
> when 
> > > BW images are printed on them. I wonder how many people view an 
> > > image in light that produces the effect. If I am looking at an 
> > image

Thanks, all for your suggestions. I swithced to mk for the somerset, 
and, while better, the d-max is still disappointing. Epson Matte 
looks a lot better!

What other rag papers are people using, and that are profiled in IP?

John,

Just last night I tested Moab Entrada Bright White and Natural against EEM, Epson Velvet FA, Epson Ultrasmooth, HPR, and PremierArt Hot Press. As expected, all have a different "look", but my initial impression is that I'm really liking the Entrada Natural. My next favorites are the Epson Velvet and Ultrasmooth. Surface and base paper color of Entrada Natural, to my eye/feel, looks nearly identical to Ultrasmooth. But, it seems to print a little "brighter" on my Epson 2200, UC inks, with IP driver.

I'll have to live with these test prints for a few weeks but, so far, I think Entrada Natural will be my new primary paper of choice.

Alan Huntley

P.S. So far, I've only tested B&W.

> 
> From: "johnmuir.geo" <johnmuir.geo@...>
> Date: 2004/07/01 Thu AM 01:34:08 EDT
> To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Best paper for B/W?
> 
> Thanks, all for your suggestions. I swithced to mk for the somerset, 
> and, while better, the d-max is still disappointing. Epson Matte 
> looks a lot better!
> 
> What other rag papers are people using, and that are profiled in IP?

I've heard of this paper, with similar reviews as yours. Where can I 
find it? And, which IP profile are you using with it?

thanks

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, 
<Alan.Huntley@c...> wrote:
> John,
> 
> Just last night I tested Moab Entrada Bright White and Natural 
against EEM, Epson Velvet FA, Epson Ultrasmooth, HPR, and PremierArt 
Hot Press. As expected, all have a different "look", but my initial 
impression is that I'm really liking the Entrada Natural. My next 
favorites are the Epson Velvet and Ultrasmooth. Surface and base 
paper color of Entrada Natural, to my eye/feel, looks nearly 
identical to Ultrasmooth. But, it seems to print a little "brighter" 
on my Epson 2200, UC inks, with IP driver.
> 
> I'll have to live with these test prints for a few weeks but, so 
far, I think Entrada Natural will be my new primary paper of choice.
> 
> Alan Huntley
> 
> P.S. So far, I've only tested B&W.
> 
> > 
> > From: "johnmuir.geo" <johnmuir.geo@y...>
> > Date: 2004/07/01 Thu AM 01:34:08 EDT
> > To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Best paper for B/W?
> > 
> > Thanks, all for your suggestions. I swithced to mk for the 
somerset, 
> > and, while better, the d-max is still disappointing. Epson Matte 
> > looks a lot better!
> > 
> > What other rag papers are people using, and that are profiled in 
IP?

Hi John,

One of the best papers I've ever used is Bergger High Definition 
Natural White smooth surface (PN32). It uses Arches 300gm cotton rag 
as the base substrate. I've not measured the reflectivity of the 
paper but visually it beats Hanhnemuhle's 300 gm paper and Moab's NW 
300gm paper.

Of course it is more expensive than either the Hanhnemuhle or the 
Entrata. You can purchase a small sample pack from Freestyle Photo.

http://www.freestylephoto.biz/sc_prod.php?cat_id=&pid=5702

Good Luck,

Don Bryant

John,

Moab papers are available from:

www.inkjetgoodies.com
www.inkjetart.com
www.moabpaper.com  (though I think they drop-ship from inkjetgoodies)

Don't remember the exact IP paper profile names, but both color and gray profiles are in the "Inkjetgoodies - MOAB" folders on Colorbyte's FTP site. I remember from last night's testing that the gray Bright White profile name is a little confusing in that the external name ends with FAW, but the internal name (that is, the one that will display in the profile list) ends with EntradaBrtWht (or something like that.) Regardless, it's pretty easy to figure out which one you need. If you can't, I'd recommend printing out the .txt file that lists all the profiles and which paper they're for.

Good luck.

Alan Huntley

> 
> From: "johnmuir.geo" <johnmuir.geo@...>
> Date: 2004/07/01 Thu PM 01:01:10 EDT
> To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Best paper for B/W?
> 
> I've heard of this paper, with similar reviews as yours. Where can I 
> find it? And, which IP profile are you using with it?
> 
> thanks
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, 
> <Alan.Huntley@c...> wrote:
> > John,
> > 
> > Just last night I tested Moab Entrada Bright White and Natural 
> against EEM, Epson Velvet FA, Epson Ultrasmooth, HPR, and PremierArt 
> Hot Press. As expected, all have a different "look", but my initial 
> impression is that I'm really liking the Entrada Natural. My next 
> favorites are the Epson Velvet and Ultrasmooth. Surface and base 
> paper color of Entrada Natural, to my eye/feel, looks nearly 
> identical to Ultrasmooth. But, it seems to print a little "brighter" 
> on my Epson 2200, UC inks, with IP driver.
> > 
> > I'll have to live with these test prints for a few weeks but, so 
> far, I think Entrada Natural will be my new primary paper of choice.
> > 
> > Alan Huntley
> > 
> > P.S. So far, I've only tested B&W.
> > 
> > > 
> > > From: "johnmuir.geo" <johnmuir.geo@y...>
> > > Date: 2004/07/01 Thu AM 01:34:08 EDT
> > > To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> > > Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Best paper for B/W?
> > > 
> > > Thanks, all for your suggestions. I swithced to mk for the 
> somerset, 
> > > and, while better, the d-max is still disappointing. Epson Matte 
> > > looks a lot better!
> > > 
> > > What other rag papers are people using, and that are profiled in 
> IP?

I just ordred the Oriental RC Lustre, RC Gloss and FB Glossy to try them.

Anybody have any experience with them ?

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "johnmuir.geo" 
<johnmuir.geo@y...> wrote:

> H group
> 
> I'm currently using the 2200 with ultrachrome inks (pk) and 
> ImagePrint. I print both to epson premium luster and to somerset. 
> While I like the quality and "depth" of black better on the luster 
> than on the somerset, I dislike the bronzing. Which is probably why 
> so many use the matte papers for B/W! 
> What recommendations do people in this group have for papers that 
> produce great B/W?
> 
> Thanks

I'd like to add to this post since Entrada neutral is quickly becoming my new favorite too. I 
tested Entrada against PremierArt Fine Art which is supposed to be the same as Epson 
UltraSmooth. I expected PremierArt to render a "sharper" image because of it's smoother 
surface but I found that the Entrada gave a sharper image. I find the color of the Entrada 
very pleasing as well. It's not bright white (no optical brighteners) but it's not so "beigey" 
either.

Same specs here, Epson 2200, matte black inkset, IP driver
Michael


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, <Alan.Huntley@c...> wrote:
> 
> Just last night I tested Moab Entrada Bright White and Natural against EEM, Epson Velvet 
FA, Epson Ultrasmooth, HPR, and PremierArt Hot Press. As expected, all have a different 
"look", but my initial impression is that I'm really liking the Entrada Natural. My next 
favorites are the Epson Velvet and Ultrasmooth. Surface and base paper color of Entrada 
Natural, to my eye/feel, looks nearly identical to Ultrasmooth. But, it seems to print a little 
"brighter" on my Epson 2200, UC inks, with IP driver.
> 
> I'll have to live with these test prints for a few weeks but, so far, I think Entrada Natural 
will be my new primary paper of choice.
> 
> Alan Huntley

Michael,

I, too, had long heard the claim that PremierArt Hot Press was the same paper as Epson Ultrasmooth. The substrate may be the same, but the coating is most definitely NOT! I much preferred the results I got from Epson Ultrasmooth.

In direct comparison, under different light sources, I found the "color" of Entrada Natural to be identical to Epson Ultrasmooth and PA Hot Press; at least, to my eye. And, Entrada's surface characteristics is nearly the same, too. The 300gsm paper seems to have slightly more surface imperfection than the 190gsm, but this is probably to be expected from a thicker (card stock type) paper. I've got all test prints displayed together in my living room, and I'm watching 'em closely to see which I like best under various light levels and light sources.

Interesting that you mention that Entrada Natural doesn't contain OB brighteners...I compared this paper to some EEM that had been exposed to typical inside (house) air and general pollutants, and found the base paper "color" to be not that different from Entrada Neutral. Could it be that once the OB bleach out of these papers that their color is not so different than non-OB papers? Hmm....

Alan Huntley

> 
> From: "Michael Pilla" <mpphoto@...>
> Date: 2004/07/01 Thu PM 03:52:15 EDT
> To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Best paper for B/W?
> 
> I'd like to add to this post since Entrada neutral is quickly becoming my new favorite too. I 
> tested Entrada against PremierArt Fine Art which is supposed to be the same as Epson 
> UltraSmooth. I expected PremierArt to render a "sharper" image because of it's smoother 
> surface but I found that the Entrada gave a sharper image. I find the color of the Entrada 
> very pleasing as well. It's not bright white (no optical brighteners) but it's not so "beigey" 
> either.
> 
> Same specs here, Epson 2200, matte black inkset, IP driver
> Michael
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, <Alan.Huntley@c...> wrote:
> > 
> > Just last night I tested Moab Entrada Bright White and Natural against EEM, Epson Velvet 
> FA, Epson Ultrasmooth, HPR, and PremierArt Hot Press. As expected, all have a different 
> "look", but my initial impression is that I'm really liking the Entrada Natural. My next 
> favorites are the Epson Velvet and Ultrasmooth. Surface and base paper color of Entrada 
> Natural, to my eye/feel, looks nearly identical to Ultrasmooth. But, it seems to print a little 
> "brighter" on my Epson 2200, UC inks, with IP driver.
> > 
> > I'll have to live with these test prints for a few weeks but, so far, I think Entrada Natural 
> will be my new primary paper of choice.
> > 
> > Alan Huntley

Alan,

>I, too, had long heard the claim that PremierArt Hot Press was the same
>paper as Epson Ultrasmooth. The substrate may be the same, but the coating
>is most definitely NOT! I much preferred the results I got from Epson
>Ultrasmooth.

I'm getting different results on Epson Scrapbook than on the beta
UltraSmooth I have.  Too bad.

I've been told the Scrapbook is PremierArt 205.  The UltraSmooth beta was
originally said to be from the same company, but it was also said to be
under an exclusive at least with respect to the weight of the paper.  It
could be that the weight and amount of calendaring of the underlying paper
is what is making the difference. 

>... I found the "color" of Entrada Natural to be identical to Epson
>Ultrasmooth and PA Hot Press; 

My conclusion was the same.  I don't think I could tell the difference
between a print on Entrada Natural and one on UltraSmooth, but my wallet
can.  I think Entrada is a bargain.

>... Entrada Natural doesn't contain OB brighteners...I compared this paper
>to some EEM that had been exposed to typical inside (house) air and general
>pollutants, and found the base paper "color" to be not that different from
>Entrada Neutral. Could it be that once the OB bleach out of these papers
>that their color is not so different than non-OB papers? Hmm....

Yep, I think they end up about the same.  In fact, some of the "natural," no
OBA papers read as brighter in their "visual density" with my X-Rite than do
the brightened papers.  The OBA papers, however, look brighter in my office
(fluorescent lights), but they read as simple bluer, which the eye must see
as "brightness."  OBAs convert UV to blue light -- until they burn out.

I'm also a fan of Moab Entrada, especially the Natural.  While it does
flake, this can usually be dealt with by brushing or wiping off the paper
before printing.  I think it is among the best bargains for a cotton paper.
I've suggested to Moab that if they supply some Entrada paper to the
Anderson Ranch workshop this summer, we could make it a workshop project to
write curves for the paper. (Moab, Utah is right next to Arches National
Park, where I'll do a little shooting before &/or after the Anderson Ranch
workshop.  I'm curious what they have there.)

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com 
______________________________


Alan Huntley

> 
> From: "Michael Pilla" <mpphoto@...>
> Date: 2004/07/01 Thu PM 03:52:15 EDT
> To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Best paper for B/W?
> 
> I'd like to add to this post since Entrada neutral is quickly becoming my
new favorite too. ...
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, <Alan.Huntley@c...>
wrote:

> > 
> > Just last night I tested Moab Entrada Bright White and Natural 
>>gainst EEM, Epson Velvet FA, Epson Ultrasmooth, HPR, and PremierArt 
>>Hot Press...
>>, so far, I think Entrada Natural will be my new primary paper of choice.

Paul,

>I'm getting different results on Epson Scrapbook than on the beta
>UltraSmooth I have.  Too bad.

Never tried the Epson Scrapbook primarily because it doesn't come in sizes
that I normally print.

>My conclusion was the same.  I don't think I could tell the difference
>between a print on Entrada Natural and one on UltraSmooth, but my wallet
>can.  I think Entrada is a bargain.

Definitely a bargain when compared to many other premium papers...and, I
don't have to mess
with flattening paper!

>The OBA papers, however, look brighter in my office
>(fluorescent lights), but they read as simple bluer, which the eye must see
>as "brightness."  OBAs convert UV to blue light -- until they burn out.

Basically, this is what I'm seeing under indirect roomlight from south
facing windows in my
living room. The Entrada BW print with tint 50,50 (IP) is v-e-r-y blue; the
tint 100,100 which
is as warm as I can go with IP 5.6 is not as blue, but clearly cold when
compared to Ultrasmooth
or Entrada Natural. The Entrada Natural print is sitting right next to the
Ultrasmooth print and,
surprisingly, given that the base paper is indistinguishable, looks somewhat
less warm. Not quite
as cool as the Epson Velvet version. It really seems to "glow" when compared
to the others.

>I'm also a fan of Moab Entrada, especially the Natural.  While it does
>flake, this can usually be dealt with by brushing or wiping off the paper
>before printing.

I'll have to watch for flaking. Thank you for mentioning it.

>I've suggested to Moab that if they supply some Entrada paper to the
>Anderson Ranch workshop this summer, we could make it a workshop project to
>write curves for the paper.

I think this would be wise thing for the Moab paper company to do. They
really need to get the
word out. Since I'm now a fan of their Natural, I'll definitely being doing
my part to alert other
digital photogs that I know. I'd like to see this paper hang around for a
long time.

Alan Huntley

What kind of profile do you use with this paper?


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "donbga" 
<dstevenbryant@m...> wrote:
> Hi John,
> 
> One of the best papers I've ever used is Bergger High Definition 
> Natural White smooth surface (PN32). It uses Arches 300gm cotton 
rag 
> as the base substrate. I've not measured the reflectivity of the 
> paper but visually it beats Hanhnemuhle's 300 gm paper and Moab's 
NW 

> 300gm paper.
> 
> Of course it is more expensive than either the Hanhnemuhle or the 
> Entrata. You can purchase a small sample pack from Freestyle Photo.
> 
> http://www.freestylephoto.biz/sc_prod.php?cat_id=&pid=5702
> 
> Good Luck,
> 
> Don Bryant

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, <Alan.Huntley@c...> wrote:
> Michael,
> 
> I, too, had long heard the claim that PremierArt Hot Press was the same paper as Epson 
Ultrasmooth. The substrate may be the same, but the coating is most definitely NOT! I 
much preferred the results I got from Epson Ultrasmooth.
> 

I've long suspected the same thing, that the papers might be identical but the coatings are 
not. I haven't tried the Epson Ultrasmooth yet but people rave about it. I wasn't too 
knocked out by the PremierArt. 

> In direct comparison, under different light sources, I found the "color" of Entrada Natural 
to be identical to Epson Ultrasmooth and PA Hot Press; at least, to my eye.
>

I've been doing some "selenium" tones in ImagePrint with settings of 80/80 in the tint 
picker. I get beautiful purplish selenium tones on the Entrada but the PA Hot Press goes a 
little green. I tried the PA with it's own profile as well as the Epson Ultrasmooth profile with 
similar results.

> Interesting that you mention that Entrada Natural doesn't contain OB brighteners...I 
compared this paper to some EEM that had been exposed to typical inside (house) air and 
general pollutants, and found the base paper "color" to be not that different from Entrada 
Neutral. Could it be that once the OB bleach out of these papers that their color is not so 
different than non-OB papers? Hmm....

I suspect that the OB papers will lose their "oomph" quickly. I also agree with Paul's post 
that OB papers are often bluer in base tone but not brighter.

So far Entrada Natural is a winner for me.

Michael

Michael,

>I get beautiful purplish selenium tones on the Entrada >but the PA Hot Press goes a 
>little green.

I found PA Hot Press to exhibit a slightly greenish tint, too. I thought it was just my old eyes! Nice to hear a confirmation from another photog.

Regards,
Alan Huntley

John,

> What kind of profile do you use with this paper?
> 

The Epson Enhanced Matt profile seems to work very well.

Don