Digital BW, The Print

Having tested a number of papers over the last month, I'd settled on 
VFA for tonal scale, but hoped to find something with less texture 
and similar tonal performance.  My final candidate (after testing the 
HPR/Red River Dourian, Hawk Mountain Condor, Arches, Crane and a few 
others) was the Epson USFA.  Note that all my work is done with the 
K3 inks.

I've profiled the paper and done several test prints, and here are my 
impressions:

1.  The paper does not have nearly the dmax of the VFA (about 1.75/L* 
14.23), but approximately the dmax of HPR (1.657/L* 16.53).  The USFA 
measures 1.660/L* 16.44.
2.  In looking at just the shadow areas of the USFA and HPR, they are 
essentially indistinguishable.  Neither has the very strong blacks of 
the VFA and this is a very apparent difference visually.
3.  In looking at the whole print, which has a wide tonal scale, the 
shadows look stronger on the USFA than on the HPR.  I believe this is 
becaused the dmin of the USFA is considerable better than the HPR 
(.014/L* 98.72 vs. .027/L*97.64).  The greater contrast of the USFA 
gives the visual impression of better shadows and a "punchier" tonal 
scale (though there is no shadow compression in the USFA, probably 
less than the HPR). 
4.  Although the USFA looks warm, it is not as warm, yellow or creamy 
as the Crane or Arches papers.  Like those two, it contains no OBAs.  
Both HPR and VFA contain OBAs, the latter more in my impression.  
Despite being cooler in color, a sheet of the HPR looks dingy and 
gray held alongside the USFA and the HPR prints look flat and a bit 
dingy in comparison.
5.  The USFA is a very luxurious paper in the hand, equalled only by 
the Arches to my taste.  It is about 350gsm and it is beautifully 
packed with an oversize box with a styrefoam "ring" to protect the 
corners and edges.  It is a very high grade, Ph-buffered paper.  The 
USFA costs less than the Arches, but slightly more than the HPR.  The 
USFA is, however, double-sided, which should save some money in 
botched test prints.  I have heard suggested that the USFA is 
actually Premeier Hot Press Fine Art, which might be less expensive.
6.  Although I am disappointed in the dmax, this paper would be my 
second choice after the VFA, particularly where the VFA texture might 
be objectionable (although I don't find that the VFA texture 
interferes with detail unless the print is lit at an angle).
7.  Finally, I am guessing the tonal performance of the VFA is partly 
a product of the texture, rather than incidental to it.  Perhaps the 
textured surface can hold more ink or reflects light differently.  
The VFA is unrivalled in my experience for a full-scale matte print 
with the K3 inks.

So, I think the USFA is quite good, but not the smooth-VFA panacea 
I'd hoped for.

Walt

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "wwodets"
<odets@c...> wrote:
>
> ...Finally, I am guessing the tonal performance of the VFA is partly 
> a product of the texture, rather than incidental to it.  Perhaps the 
> textured surface can hold more ink or reflects light differently. ..

Walt, I think you have something there. While I doubt the texture is
actually responsible for better dmax in this instance ( I suspect VFA
has a better coating), I have found it to increase that impression.
Here, all of the Hahnemuhle papers have the same dmax (well, so close
it's down to measurement error, or so close as to be visually the
same) but the more textured surfaces seem to have blacker blacks than
PhotoRag. I speculate this is because a smoother surface may begin to
have a slight bit of actual though very diffuse reflection or sheen of
the ambient light in the room. William Turner, German Etching, and
White Velvet being more textured might break that up more. You know,
like those good old Elvis velvet paintings.
Anyway, the effect is slight, and dependent on the lighting in the
room. Also, again, it's an impression not a measurable reality.
By the way, I'm not sure White Velvet is getting the attention it
deserves, very nice.
Tyler

Hello Walt,

>after testing the HPR/Red River Dourian

Did you get the same measurememnts on these?


>I have heard suggested that the USFA is actually Premeier Hot 
>Press Fine Art,

Same here, but I have only tested PHP (with slightly different
results, see below).


>USFA - does not have nearly the dmax of the VFA...but approximately 
>the dmax of HPR...
>In looking at just the shadow areas of the USFA and HPR, they are 
>essentially indistinguishable.  Neither has the very strong blacks 
>of the VFA and this is a very apparent difference visually.
>Note that all my work is done with the K3 inks.

In my visual comparisons of HPR, VFA and PHP I get slightly different
results (VFA and HPR both in the 5 group with PHP lagging behind in
the 4 group).  I'm wondering if the difference is because PHP is
actually different than USFA or because I use a different ink (Eboni
BO) for my tests...or maybe just differences in production batches
(because my VFA and HPR look about the same).

Anyway, the PHP I tested is very bright as you say for USFA,
remarkable for a non-OBA paper.  Nice stuff.  A lot of people favor it.

In a similar vein, I recently took a chance on a box of Merlin Natural
because I was impressed with it's look last summer when I reviewed it.
It turns out to work really nicely with K3 inks and I have moved it
to my A-List.  In particular, at ABW 2h,10v it resembles my old
favorite darkroom paper, Ilford MGFB II.  By itself a print looks
neutral, but put it next to a cold tone print and you see it's slight
warmpth.  I loved that paper and this is the closest I've come to it's
look so far.  Also, at ABW 0h,0v, it comes as close to a true
uncolorized neutral black as I've seen so far on any paper (an elusive
goal with K3)...Hmmm, I just had a thought: maybe that's why it seems
like such a good fit with K3 inks; if the neutral setting gives a
truly neutral tone then maybe somehow it's in synch with the K3 system
(I always use the VFA paper setting).  What do you think?  Anyway,
it's really nice stuff and I'm looking forward to doing more work with
it. 

I'm appreciating more and more ABW's ability to so easily fine tune
the tone.  I'm finding that every paper has it's "sweet spot", a
setting that is particularly harmonious and photographically
convincing.  Sometimes changing just a single ABW unit makes a big
difference and some obvious tinge disappears (sometimes I think single
ABW units are too coarse, and wish we could enter decimal values like
12.3).

I know these aesthetic things are hard to describe and probably
aren't quantifiable, but Merlin Natural seems to fit more comfortably
with K3 inks than some other papers do.  With some it's been a
struggle to find a good ABW setting that really clicks into place (for
example I have yet to find a setting for Condor BW that I'm fully
satisfied with).  Are you experiencing this?

Regards,
Clayton


Info on black and white digital printing at    
http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm

Has anyone tried Eboni ink on Ultrasmooth?

> From: Tyler Boley <tyler@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 02:17:03 -0000
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Epson Ultrasmooth Fine Art, VFA, HPR . .
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "wwodets"
> <odets@c...> wrote:
>> 
>> ...Finally, I am guessing the tonal performance of the VFA is partly
>> a product of the texture, rather than incidental to it.  Perhaps the
>> textured surface can hold more ink or reflects light differently. ..
> 
> Walt, I think you have something there. While I doubt the texture is
> actually responsible for better dmax in this instance ( I suspect VFA
> has a better coating), I have found it to increase that impression.
> Here, all of the Hahnemuhle papers have the same dmax (well, so close
> it's down to measurement error, or so close as to be visually the
> same) but the more textured surfaces seem to have blacker blacks than
> PhotoRag. I speculate this is because a smoother surface may begin to
> have a slight bit of actual though very diffuse reflection or sheen of
> the ambient light in the room. William Turner, German Etching, and
> White Velvet being more textured might break that up more. You know,
> like those good old Elvis velvet paintings.
> Anyway, the effect is slight, and dependent on the lighting in the
> room. Also, again, it's an impression not a measurable reality.
> By the way, I'm not sure White Velvet is getting the attention it
> deserves, very nice.
> Tyler
>

Yes I can see the "sheen" you talk about, which I would describe as 
a "milkiness" that reduces the impression of black.  Speaking of 
Hahnemuhle, Cary Grant once said that with a tuxedo one wore very 
dark blue socks, rather than black, because the blue ones had less 
sheen and looked darker.  

And what do you think of my speculation on the dmin and USFA?  I 
think the (relative) dinginess of the HPR makes the blacks look dingy 
too.

This all brings up the issue of *comparative* evaluations and how 
much weight should be given them.  Of the three top papers (for me), 
the HPR black problem is the only one that bothes me seen alone.  The 
USFA blacks look fine if I don't compare them side-by-side to the 
VFA.  

Also, I looked up White Velvet and apparently Hahnemuhle has stopped 
making it.  I gather you mostly use the Hahnemuhle papers.  Is that 
correct?  And what would you go to without the White Velevet?

Thanks,
Walt
  
--- In Dig
italBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Tyler Boley" <tyler@t...> 
wrote:
>
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "wwodets"
> <odets@c...> wrote:
> >
> > ...Finally, I am guessing the tonal performance of the VFA is 
partly 
> > a product of the texture, rather than incidental to it.  Perhaps 
the 
> > textured surface can hold more ink or reflects light 
differently. ..
> 
> Walt, I think you have something there. While I doubt the texture is
> actually responsible for better dmax in this instance ( I suspect 
VFA
> has a better coating), I have found it to increase that impression.
> Here, all of the Hahnemuhle papers have the same dmax (well, so 
close
> it's down to measurement error, or so close as to be visually the
> same) but the more textured surfaces seem to have blacker blacks 
than
> PhotoRag. I speculate this is because a smoother surface may begin 
to
> have a slight bit of actual though very diffuse reflection or sheen 
of

> the ambient light in the room. William Turner, German Etching, and
> White Velvet being more textured might break that up more. You know,
> like those good old Elvis velvet paintings.
> Anyway, the effect is slight, and dependent on the lighting in the
> room. Also, again, it's an impression not a measurable reality.
> By the way, I'm not sure White Velvet is getting the attention it
> deserves, very nice.
> Tyler
>

Yes, I find the HPR and R.R. Dourian measure almost identically 
(certainly within the range of measurement error).  The ICC profiles 
QTR generates can be laid on top of each other and are also 
essentially identical.

On your observations about HPR and VFA, I find (don't forget, with 
the K3 inks) that VFA has consistently much better dmax over many 
batches of both papers, each in two different sizes.  This is very 
apparent in just looking at the images and in measurement.  The L* 
measures for VFA run in the low 14's, for HPR in the mid to high 
16's.  I have only the single Super A3 box of the USFA for 
comparison.  In the shadows, it seems identical visually to the HPR 
and measures essentially the same.  The USFA, however, shows better 
shadow separation, spanning the 90-100 densities from L* 26.98 to 
16.44.  The HPR is 24.52-16.53.  This separation could make the USFA 
look weaker, but then you need a PS curves adjustment to get any 
compression you want.  The Eboni could also change the results for 
sure.  So I don't know if the USFA is PHP because you tested one 
paper and ink and I've tested another paper and ink.  We'd have to 
control *one* of the variables!

Yes the USFA is very bright for a non-OBA paper, and I looked at it 
under a black light: it is dead silent.  The HPR glows like it just 
flew in from Mars by comparison.  The USFA is also just very pleasing 
in color: neither yellow nor dingy, etc.

I will look at your review of the Merlin Natural.  Tuning the color 
with ABW is very nice.  With the USFA I am using a -12 -16 adjustment 
which nicely neutralizes the warmth of the paper color.  Oddly, it 
even seems to cool down the highlights.  

Yes, I think the way a paper "falls" in the ABW does have a big 
effect on our perception of it, which is probably one of the reasons 
the Epson papers have been looking good to me.  "Photographically 
convincing" is a good phrase and one I think of often in looking at 
these paper/ink combinations.  In part, this means to me that I do 
not see the paper or ink, but the photograph, that the media is a 
transparent conveyor of the image.  With all the detailed contol and 
endless permutations we have with this digital process it's very easy 
to lose sight of this.  I've spent more time looking at *paper* in 
the past six or eight months than I did in my previous 40 years of 
photography. 

I should mention that moving the ABW color selector can substantially 
changes both the profile of the paper and the dmax.  In general, any 
adjustment lowers dmax a bit.  So, I've been doing an ICC profile for 
any given ABW setting, which has proven quite worthwhile.  

I will look at the Merlin issue.

Best,
Walt




--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Clayton Jones" 
<cj@c...> wrote:
>
> Hello Walt,
> 
> >after testing the HPR/Red River Dourian
> 
> Did you get the same measurememnts on these?
> 
> 
> >I have heard suggested that the USFA is actually Premeier Hot 
> >Press Fine Art,
> 
> Same here, but I have only tested PHP (with slightly different
> results, see below).
> 
> 
> >USFA - does not have nearly the dmax of the VFA...but 
approximately 
> >the dmax of HPR...
> >In looking at just the shadow areas of the USFA and HPR, they are 
> >essentially indistinguishable.  Neither has the very strong blacks 
> >of the VFA and this is a very apparent difference visually.
> >Note that all my work is done with the K3 inks.
> 
> In my visual comparisons of HPR, VFA and PHP I get slightly 
different
> results (VFA and HPR both in the 5 group with PHP lagging behind in
> the 4 group).  I'm wondering if the difference is because PHP is
> actually different than USFA or because I use a different ink (Eboni
> BO) for my tests...or maybe just differences in production batches
> (because my VFA and HPR look about the same).
> 
> Anyway, the PHP I tested is very bright as you say for USFA,
> remarkable for a non-OBA paper.  Nice stuff.  A lot of people favor 
it.
> 
> In a similar vein, I recently took a chance on a box of Merlin 
Natural
> because I was impressed with it's look last summer when I reviewed 
it.
> It turns out to work really nicely with K3 inks and I have moved it
> to my A-List.  In particular, at ABW 2h,10v it resembles my old
> favorite darkroom paper, Ilford MGFB II.  By itself a print looks
> neutral, but put it next to a cold tone print and you see it's 
slight
> warmpth.  I loved that paper and this is the closest I've come to 
it's
> look so far.  Also, at ABW 0h,0v, it comes as close to a true
> uncolorized neutral black as I've seen so far on any paper (an 
elusive
> goal with K3)...Hmmm, I just had a thought: maybe that's why it 
seems
> like such a good fit with K3 inks; if the neutral setting gives a
> truly neutral tone then maybe somehow it's in synch with the K3 
system
> (I always use the VFA paper setting).  What do you think?  Anyway,
> it's really nice stuff and I'm looking forward to doing more work 
with
> it. 
> 
> I'm appreciating more and more ABW's ability to so easily fine tune
> the tone.  I'm finding that every paper has it's "sweet spot", a
> setting that is particularly harmonious and photographically
> convincing.  Sometimes changing just a single ABW unit makes a big
> difference and some obvious tinge disappears (sometimes I think 
single
> ABW units are too coarse, and wish we could enter decimal values 
like
> 12.3).
> 
> I know these aesthetic things are hard to describe and probably
> aren't quantifiable, but Merlin Natural seems to fit more 
comfortably
> with K3 inks than some other papers do.  With some it's been a
> struggle to find a good ABW setting that really clicks into place 
(for

> example I have yet to find a setting for Condor BW that I'm fully
> satisfied with).  Are you experiencing this?
> 
> Regards,
> Clayton
> 
> 
> Info on black and white digital printing at    
> http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm
>

Steve,

> Has anyone tried Eboni ink on Ultrasmooth?

Yes, it and Permajet (not MIS) Alpha have been my standard papers for
several years.  I think they are the best non-brightened papers.
UltraSmooth usually has a bit less dmax than Alpha, but a brighter base.
The k3 drivers favor UltraSmooth relative to the Innova coatings (which
includes Alpha) when Epson MK is used.  However, there is less of this
relative change with Eboni.

I think one has to be careful to profile UltraSmooth carefully.  It has a
slightly different contrast distribution, and can have a bit too cool
shadows for me with some inksets if not carefully profiled.  

PremierArt Hot Press 205 is the bargain route to the same basic paper.  I
the U.S. www.Atlex.com is probably the low price leader on PA 205.  MIS also
sells it and will ship overseas.  So, it's cheap to give the paper or
coating a try. 

Sure wish they could kick the dmax up to 1.75.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

> Sure wish they could kick the dmax up to 1.75.
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com
>

Me too.  The VFA reliably measures exactly that (1.752 last time I 
looked).  It is a surprising difference.

I also notice that the USFA is by far the most difficult to reliably 
profile for ICC profiles with the i1.  I've been doing several readings 
and then averaging them.  I am a bit puzzled by this.  Is the 
i1 "expecting" OBAs?

Walt

Walt,

> ... The VFA reliably measures ... 1.75 ...

I like a smooth surface, but I'll definitely be giving VFA a try.

> I also notice that the USFA is by far the most difficult to reliably
> profile for ICC profiles with the i1.  I've been doing several readings
> and then averaging them.  I am a bit puzzled by this.  Is the
> i1 "expecting" OBAs?

I doubt it is expecting OBAs, but I don't know.

I've been playing with Roy's "Create ICC" (which I may use with the R220 EZ
system as a first test).  I'm not sure if what I'm seeing is similar to what
you're describing, but I've noticed that the ICC outputs are affected by the
character of the input file.  I'm using an X-Rite and manually inputting
only 21 steps.  There seem to be a lot of variables that can affect these
things.  

One factor appears to be the extent of contrast in the input file's shadows.
It may be that low input contrast, noise and other factors result in some
output inconsistencies.  

I'm not that far down the learning curve yet, but from what I see, a system
will benefit from having enough manual controls that one can tweak the input
and output characteristics in addition to having the ICC.  With the ICC in
the "Print with Preview" workflow (now integrated into the standard "Print"
workflow of Elements 4), I'll be using the Epson driver and keeping the
Color Controls activated to help deal with some of these problems.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark" 
<paul.roark@v...> wrote:

Paul,

As I said earlier, the VFA texture does not seem to interfere with 
detail unless the lighting on the print is at an acute angle.  But 
that was true with matte silver papers too, even worse.  Perhaps the 
physical feel of the paper is an issue, but most people seem to find 
that the texture bespeaks a better paper.  I like the physical feel 
of a smooth paper.  The other downside of the VFA is the OBAs (which 
are fairly high I think), but I don't know how seriously to take 
that.  Certainly the Wilhelm figures substantially favor the USFA 
over the VFA.

On the ICC profiles, I was talking about variations in the raw 
numbers read off the paper.  Given a set of raw numbers, I don't see 
inconsistencies in the output of the profiles.  The program will, 
however, produce erroneous (and unusable) profiles unless there is a 
linear progression in the shadows.  Any two adjacent same readings or 
reversals in the progression will not produce a usable profile.  On 
the 2400 this made HPR unusable with Create ICC (slight reversals), 
but the 4800 has corrected that.

Best,
Walt

>
> Walt,
> 
> > ... The VFA reliably measures ... 1.75 ...
> 
> I like a smooth surface, but I'll definitely be giving VFA a try.
> 
> > I also notice that the USFA is by far the most difficult to 
reliably
> > profile for ICC profiles with the i1.  I've been doing several 
readings
> > and then averaging them.  I am a bit puzzled by this.  Is the
> > i1 "expecting" OBAs?
> 
> I doubt it is expecting OBAs, but I don't know.
> 
> I've been playing with Roy's "Create ICC" (which I may use with the 
R220 EZ
> system as a first test).  I'm not sure if what I'm seeing is 
similar to what
> you're describing, but I've noticed that the ICC outputs are 
affected by the
> character of the input file.  I'm using an X-Rite and manually 
inputting
> only 21 steps.  There seem to be a lot of variables that can affect 
these
> things.  
> 
> One factor appears to be the extent of contrast in the input file's 
shadows.
> It may be that low input contrast, noise and other factors result 
in some
> output inconsistencies.  
> 
> I'm not that far down the learning curve yet, but from what I see, 
a system
> will benefit from having enough manual controls that one can tweak 
the input
> and output characteristics in addition to having the ICC.  With the 
ICC in
> the "Print with Preview" workflow (now integrated into the 
standard "Print"
> workflow of Elements 4), I'll be using the Epson driver and keeping 
the

> Color Controls activated to help deal with some of these problems.
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com
>

Hello Walt,

>Yes the USFA is very bright for a non-OBA paper, and I looked at it 
>under a black light: it is dead silent.  The HPR glows like it just 
>flew in from Mars by comparison.  

Does the Dourian look the same?  Does HPR and/or Dourian "glow" any
more or less than other papers with OBAs?

Regards,
Clayton


Info on black and white digital printing at    
http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm

I've profiled USFA for color profiles using the Xrite Pulse system (UV filter version).  Perfect.  I also use it to create the 'profiles' for USFA for IJC/OPM.  Again, perfect.  I am profiling both OBA and non-OBA papers without any problems.
 
Tom Baker

Paul Roark <paul.roark@...> wrote:
Walt,

> ... The VFA reliably measures ... 1.75 ...

I like a smooth surface, but I'll definitely be giving VFA a try.

> I also notice that the USFA is by far the most difficult to reliably
> profile for ICC profiles with the i1.  I've been doing several readings
> and then averaging them.  I am a bit puzzled by this.  Is the
> i1 "expecting" OBAs?

I doubt it is expecting OBAs, but I don't know.

I've been playing with Roy's "Create ICC" (which I may use with the R220 EZ
system as a first test).  I'm not sure if what I'm seeing is similar to what
you're describing, but I've noticed that the ICC outputs are affected by the
character of the input file.  I'm using an X-Rite and manually inputting
only 21 steps.  There seem to be a lot of variables that can affect these
things.  

One factor appears to be the extent of contrast in the input file's shadows.
It may be that low input contrast, noise and other factors result in some
output inconsistencies.  

I'm not that far down the learning curve yet, but from what I see, a system
will benefit from having enough manual controls that one can tweak the input
and output characteristics in addition to having the ICC.  With the ICC in
the "Print with Preview" workflow (now integrated into the standard "Print"
workflow of Elements 4), I'll be using the Epson driver and keeping the
Color Controls activated to help deal with some of these problems.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com 





Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other resources as they are often being updated.

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:
- As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep them short.
- Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames. Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from the membership without notice.
- Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital B&W printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be removed from the membership.
- By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group Owner and Moderators. See “Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines” in the Files section:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/

BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE “OWNER” AND “MODERATORS” OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS, GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF THE  “OWNER” AND “MODERATORS” OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE INABILITY TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP.




---------------------------------
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS 


    Visit your group "DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint" on the web.
  
    To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
 DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
  
    Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 


---------------------------------




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

That has been my experience also. William Turner and G. Etching
"appear" to produce deeper richer blacks, especially with monochrome,
than smoother excellent fine art papers, although they don't measure
that way. The reflection theory makes total sense to me and although I
have thought about that, I've  never heard anyone actually articulate
it in regard to the various coatings of matte textures. I guess that
could be a characteristic of all types of printmaking media, but
especially coated stock.

Also, if we really want to take this further (I don't really) this
visual-psychological aspect of print tonality is AS important or more
important than densitometer readings of dmax values when evaluating
any papers shadow rendition when exibited in the real world. It is
unsetteling, but true. And, we also have the glass, plexiglass that 
changes things too.

I do belive people have talked about this reflection phenomena that
may render a glossy prints shadow less dense visually than one on a
good matte rag, while showing a far greater dmax when measured
scientifically. When you get these glossy prints in a gallery or
museum you are talking about even more surface reflections and
scattered light.  That is one of the reasons I never get hung up on
dmax numbers and when I hear them I take them with a grain of salt. I
think they are just one thing to look at among many, even the scale of
an image should be taken into account.

John


By the way, that Crane MMax is certainly not revolutionary like they
claimed. I kind of expeced that was all hype, and its not that bright
either. It is really where they should have been 5 years ago.

John

> it's down to measurement error, or so close as to be visually the
> same) but the more textured surfaces seem to have blacker blacks than
> PhotoRag. I speculate this is because a smoother surface may begin to
> have a slight bit of actual though very diffuse reflection or sheen of
> the ambient light in the room. William Turner, German Etching, and
> White Velvet being more textured might break that up more. You know,

Occasionally I've had drop of ink mar a print, but only when the ink in 
the cartridges got really low. Recently, though, I've gotten horizontal 
lines of pure ink, about 1 to 2 mm in thickness on EPSM.  There are 
twelve lines. One goes for about 2 inches. The others are mainly one 
inch, and a few are .75 inch long. They start on the right edge of the 
print. I've checked the cartridges, and they're nearly full.  Has anyone 
experienced this, or have a theory as to what the problem is?  I made 
sure that I got a good nozzle check before making the print.

The standards set up for densitometric instruments took precisely the
glossy reflective characteristics into account. Otherwise the
instruments would have given very poor readings of such samples. Hence
the 45 degree angle required between illumination  of the sample and
sensor position. That also gives glossy samples an edge in readings
over matt ones because you are actually getting more specular surface
reflections making it to the sensor from matt samples and thereby
degrading the results. [ and doing so very scientifically ;') ]

Real world eyeballs however are forced to take real world conditions
as they are and not as we might wish them to be. ( Well, I should
strike that I suppose. The mind and emotions are known to interpose
between sight and interpretation on occasion I'm told.)

Regards
Duane

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "john dean"
<deanwork2003@y...> wrote:

>
> That has been my experience also. William Turner and G. Etching
> "appear" to produce deeper richer blacks, especially with monochrome,
> than smoother excellent fine art papers, although they don't measure
> that way. The reflection theory makes total sense to me and although I
> have thought about that, I've  never heard anyone actually articulate
> it in regard to the various coatings of matte textures. I guess that
> could be a characteristic of all types of printmaking media, but
> especially coated stock.
> 
> Also, if we really want to take this further (I don't really) this
> visual-psychological aspect of print tonality is AS important or more
> important than densitometer readings of dmax values when evaluating
> any papers shadow rendition when exibited in the real world. It is
> unsetteling, but true. And, we also have the glass, plexiglass that 
> changes things too.
> 
> I do belive people have talked about this reflection phenomena that
> may render a glossy prints shadow less dense visually than one on a
> good matte rag, while showing a far greater dmax when measured
> scientifically. When you get these glossy prints in a gallery or
> museum you are talking about even more surface reflections and
> scattered light.  That is one of the reasons I never get hung up on
> dmax numbers and when I hear them I take them with a grain of salt. I
> think they are just one thing to look at among many, even the scale of
> an image should be taken into account.
> 
> John
> 
> 
> By the way, that Crane MMax is certainly not revolutionary like they
> claimed. I kind of expeced that was all hype, and its not that bright
> either. It is really where they should have been 5 years ago.
> 
> John
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > it's down to measurement error, or so close as to be visually the
> > same) but the more textured surfaces seem to have blacker blacks than
> > PhotoRag. I speculate this is because a smoother surface may begin to
> > have a slight bit of actual though very diffuse reflection or sheen of
> > the ambient light in the room. William Turner, German Etching, and
> > White Velvet being more textured might break that up more. You know,
>

Exactly.

As I have said before, it would be interesting to see comparative
measurements from an integrating sphere spectrophotometer.  Surely there is
someone on this list that has one of those babies tucked away somewhere.
Only when the light source is fully diffuse do surface characteristics begin
equalise.  One could argue that matte papers would also have an advantage in
such lighting due to their ability to bounce photons inwards for another go
at absorption.  Maybe this is what we observe with more textured vs smoother
matte papers.  So there is the possibility that greater texture can lead to
a greater specular component but also lead to greater absorption. If the
extra texture is randomly dispersed, though, 0/45 degree geometry would
measure the difference.  So as Duane mentions the equipment we use
accommodates both potential phenomena.

At any rate, when I compare matte vs "photo" semi-matte prints in very
diffuse lighting the PK prints look considerably darker - consistent with
measurements.  I still think that's simply because those photon adsorbing
(carbon) molecules are simply less dispersed and can soak things up more.
To get a better matte ink you need either (a) much smaller photon absorbing
molecules such that their density once dispersed in paper is still high or
(b) a coating that doesn't disperse those molecules as much.  People are no
doubt working on both and the ideal would be to coordinate both at the same
time...


> From: dlruckus <dlruckus@...>
 .

> 
> The standards set up for densitometric instruments took precisely the
> glossy reflective characteristics into account. Otherwise the
> instruments would have given very poor readings of such samples. Hence
> the 45 degree angle required between illumination  of the sample and
> sensor position. 
>That also gives glossy samples an edge in readings
> over matt ones because you are actually getting more specular surface
> reflections making it to the sensor from matt samples and thereby
> degrading the results. [ and doing so very scientifically ;') ]
> 
> Real world eyeballs however are forced to take real world conditions
> as they are and not as we might wish them to be.

I don't understand about 85% of what is said on this board. But I remember from 
engineering skool, that the way scientist and engineers used to achieve almost 
perfect blacks was thusly. They'd make a block of needles or razor blades on end 
  and shine the light at the points. The light would bounce around heading down 
and getting absorbed at every bounce. I think black velvet works the same way.

Could a coating be designed to sort of do this? Could a way be found to print on 
black velvet? Perhaps by spraying a white pigment on all but the Zone 0 black.
David




john dean wrote:

> That has been my experience also. William Turner and G. Etching
> "appear" to produce deeper richer blacks, especially with monochrome,
> than smoother excellent fine art papers, although they don't measure
> that way. The reflection theory makes total sense to me and although I
> have thought about that, I've  never heard anyone actually articulate
> it in regard to the various coatings of matte textures. I guess that
> could be a characteristic of all types of printmaking media, but
> especially coated stock.
> 
> Also, if we really want to take this further (I don't really) this
> visual-psychological aspect of print tonality is AS important or more
> important than densitometer readings of dmax values when evaluating
> any papers shadow rendition when exibited in the real world. It is
> unsetteling, but true. And, we also have the glass, plexiglass that
> changes things too.
> 
> I do belive people have talked about this reflection phenomena that
> may render a glossy prints shadow less dense visually than one on a
> good matte rag, while showing a far greater dmax when measured
> scientifically. When you get these glossy prints in a gallery or
> museum you are talking about even more surface reflections and
> scattered light.  That is one of the reasons I never get hung up on
> dmax numbers and when I hear them I take them with a grain of salt. I
> think they are just one thing to look at among many, even the scale of
> an image should be taken into account.
> 
> John
> 
> 
> By the way, that Crane MMax is certainly not revolutionary like they
> claimed. I kind of expeced that was all hype, and its not that bright
> either. It is really where they should have been 5 years ago.
> 
> John
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  > it's down to measurement error, or so close as to be visually the
>  > same) but the more textured surfaces seem to have blacker blacks than
>  > PhotoRag. I speculate this is because a smoother surface may begin to
>  > have a slight bit of actual though very diffuse reflection or sheen of
>  > the ambient light in the room. William Turner, German Etching, and
>  > White Velvet being more textured might break that up more. You know,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other resources 
> as they are often being updated.
> 
> 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:
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to 
> keep them short.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames. 
> Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from the 
> membership without notice.
> - Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital B&W 
> printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be removed 
> from the membership.
> - By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and 
> guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group Owner 
> and Moderators. See \ufffdGroup Topic, Rules and Guidelines\ufffd in the Files 
> section:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/
> 
> BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT 
> YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE \ufffdOWNER\ufffd AND 
> \ufffdMODERATORS\ufffd OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO 
> YOU FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR 
> EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF 
> PROFITS, GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF THE  
> \ufffdOWNER\ufffd AND \ufffdMODERATORS\ufffd OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN 
> ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE 
> OR THE INABILITY TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) 
> UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; 
> (iii) STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE 
> PRINT YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, 
> THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SPONSORED LINKS
> Digital wedding photography 
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Digital+wedding+photography&w1=Digital+wedding+photography&w2=Learn+digital+photography&w3=Digital+photography+college&w4=Digital+photography&w5=Digital+photography+web+site&w6=Digital+photography+course&c=6&s=188&.sig=Umur-3rsLOic7dZMwVL94w> 
> 	Learn digital photography 
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Learn+digital+photography&w1=Digital+wedding+photography&w2=Learn+digital+photography&w3=Digital+photography+college&w4=Digital+photography&w5=Digital+photography+web+site&w6=Digital+photography+course&c=6&s=188&.sig=emApqtvj0kHQhppIzRrNgw> 
> 	Digital photography college 
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Digital+photography+college&w1=Digital+wedding+photography&w2=Learn+digital+photography&w3=Digital+photography+college&w4=Digital+photography&w5=Digital+photography+web+site&w6=Digital+photography+course&c=6&s=188&.sig=aIiABJLTZsUnmWBs4mZwuA> 
> 
> Digital photography 
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Digital+photography&w1=Digital+wedding+photography&w2=Learn+digital+photography&w3=Digital+photography+college&w4=Digital+photography&w5=Digital+photography+web+site&w6=Digital+photography+course&c=6&s=188&.sig=pJmwqgVzec3JGBtWYlPbOg> 
> 	Digital photography web site 
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Digital+photography+web+site&w1=Digital+wedding+photography&w2=Learn+digital+photography&w3=Digital+photography+college&w4=Digital+photography&w5=Digital+photography+web+site&w6=Digital+photography+course&c=6&s=188&.sig=BMII8rtDZlAtVdZsPhaZqw> 
> 	Digital photography course 
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Digital+photography+course&w1=Digital+wedding+photography&w2=Learn+digital+photography&w3=Digital+photography+college&w4=Digital+photography&w5=Digital+photography+web+site&w6=Digital+photography+course&c=6&s=188&.sig=OrnrutXVhHZu-7E7ccLtuw> 
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
> 
>     *  Visit your group "DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>       <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint>" on
>       the web.
>        
>     *  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>        DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>       <mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
>        
>     *  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
>       Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "wwodets" <odets@c...> wrote:
...
> And what do you think of my speculation on the dmin and USFA?  I 
> think the (relative) dinginess of the HPR makes the blacks look dingy 
> too.

Makes some sense of course. Anything that widens the scale from paper white to ink black 
would help. On the other hand, sometimes some paper/ink just seem to have less life than 
others for reasons hard to quantify.

...
> Also, I looked up White Velvet and apparently Hahnemuhle has stopped 
> making it.  I gather you mostly use the Hahnemuhle papers.  Is that 
> correct?  And what would you go to without the White Velevet?

I had no idea they dropped White Velvet, recently bought a bunch. Jimmy Doyle could tell 
us more, it's still on his site.
I do use mostly H papers, but am moving toward some of the Innova paers as well. I'm 
trying to drop PhotoRag entirely in favor of Innova PhotoSmooth. They are nearly 
indistinguishable, with Innova perhpas a bit less flakey, and perhaps less pricey 
stranglehold on the market. I'll test this new Crane also.
Personally I don't like these smooth papers, but clients do, so I must carry them.
Without White Velvet I would begin testing the VFA again, they have certain similarities, 
and you and others are reporting good results.
But how it does with Piezotones is my concern. Before White Velvet we had nothing bright 
white with a pretty tooth, so it's a good option.
Tyler

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "john dean" 
<deanwork2003@y...> wrote:
...
> Also, if we really want to take this further (I don't really) this
> visual-psychological aspect of print tonality is AS important or more
> important than densitometer readings of dmax values when evaluating
> any papers shadow rendition when exhibited in the real world. It is
> unsettling, but true. 

Most definitely. I think the numbers help lead us, but the final judgement is a visceral 
reaction to an object of art. I have a few I love here on uncoated papers with "bad" 
numbers.

> And, we also have the glass, plexiglass that 
> changes things too.

Yup, some of these differences disappear.
...
> 
> By the way, that Crane MMax is certainly not revolutionary like they
> claimed. I kind of expeced that was all hype, and its not that bright
> either. It is really where they should have been 5 years ago.

Darn, but I was not optimistic. I think we are up against the wall with ink and coating 
technology. Until something significantly different comes along, we're all in the same 
neighborhood with small differences.
Then again, where we are is certainly making for some lovely prints.
Tyler

I wouldn't be a bit surprised if the effect you are referring to
couldn't partly explain some of the d'max loss that occurs with ink
flooding on some papers ie: finding black lighter than darkest gray.
Maybe it just got all the holes between the needles filled in. :) 

Regards
Duane

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, dannysoar
<dannysoar@a...> wrote:
>
> I don't understand about 85% of what is said on this board. But I
remember from 
> engineering skool, that the way scientist and engineers used to
achieve almost 
> perfect blacks was thusly. They'd make a block of needles or razor
blades on end 
>   and shine the light at the points. The light would bounce around
heading down 
> and getting absorbed at every bounce. I think black velvet works the
same way.
> 
> Could a coating be designed to sort of do this? Could a way be found
to print on 
> black velvet? Perhaps by spraying a white pigment on all but the
Zone 0 black.

> David
> 
> 
> 
>

John-

Since I started this round of this perpetual ruckus, let me say that 
how a print *looks* is certainly the only criterion.  To the extent 
that measurements help us find the things that actually look better, 
they are useful.  In my experience, the one standout among these 
matte papers is VFA with K3 inks, in terms of how people actually see 
it.  The most inexperienced viewer perceives that the blacks are 
deeper than anything else I've put next to it.  The qualities of VFA 
have also been apparent in the numbers, so the numbers here have been 
useful to me.

Whether such comparative evaluations are the way to go is another 
question.  

Walt 

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "john dean" 
<deanwork2003@y...> wrote:
>
> That has been my experience also. William Turner and G. Etching
> "appear" to produce deeper richer blacks, especially with 
monochrome,
> than smoother excellent fine art papers, although they don't measure
> that way. The reflection theory makes total sense to me and 
although I
> have thought about that, I've  never heard anyone actually 
articulate
> it in regard to the various coatings of matte textures. I guess that
> could be a characteristic of all types of printmaking media, but
> especially coated stock.
> 
> Also, if we really want to take this further (I don't really) this
> visual-psychological aspect of print tonality is AS important or 
more
> important than densitometer readings of dmax values when evaluating
> any papers shadow rendition when exibited in the real world. It is
> unsetteling, but true. And, we also have the glass, plexiglass that 
> changes things too.
> 
> I do belive people have talked about this reflection phenomena that
> may render a glossy prints shadow less dense visually than one on a
> good matte rag, while showing a far greater dmax when measured
> scientifically. When you get these glossy prints in a gallery or
> museum you are talking about even more surface reflections and
> scattered light.  That is one of the reasons I never get hung up on
> dmax numbers and when I hear them I take them with a grain of salt. 
I
> think they are just one thing to look at among many, even the scale 
of
> an image should be taken into account.
> 
> John
> 
> 
> By the way, that Crane MMax is certainly not revolutionary like they
> claimed. I kind of expeced that was all hype, and its not that 
bright
> either. It is really where they should have been 5 years ago.
> 
> John
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > it's down to measurement error, or so close as to be visually the
> > same) but the more textured surfaces seem to have blacker blacks 
than
> > PhotoRag. I speculate this is because a smoother surface may 
begin to
> > have a slight bit of actual though very diffuse reflection or 
sheen of
> > the ambient light in the room. William Turner, German Etching, and
> > White Velvet being more textured might break that up more. You 
know,
>

Walt,

I agree with your assessment of VFA.  Highest dmax of all the matte  
papers and best looking prints with the k3 inks.

Carl

On Nov 13, 2005, at 9:13 PM, wwodets wrote:

> John-
>
> Since I started this round of this perpetual ruckus, let me say that
> how a print *looks* is certainly the only criterion.  To the extent
> that measurements help us find the things that actually look better,
> they are useful.  In my experience, the one standout among these
> matte papers is VFA with K3 inks, in terms of how people actually see
> it.  The most inexperienced viewer perceives that the blacks are
> deeper than anything else I've put next to it.  The qualities of VFA
> have also been apparent in the numbers, so the numbers here have been
> useful to me.
>
> Whether such comparative evaluations are the way to go is another
> question.
>
> Walt
>
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "john dean"
> <deanwork2003@y...> wrote:
>>
>> That has been my experience also. William Turner and G. Etching
>> "appear" to produce deeper richer blacks, especially with
> monochrome,
>> than smoother excellent fine art papers, although they don't measure
>> that way. The reflection theory makes total sense to me and
> although I
>> have thought about that, I've  never heard anyone actually
> articulate
>> it in regard to the various coatings of matte textures. I guess that
>> could be a characteristic of all types of printmaking media, but
>> especially coated stock.
>>
>> Also, if we really want to take this further (I don't really) this
>> visual-psychological aspect of print tonality is AS important or
> more
>> important than densitometer readings of dmax values when evaluating
>> any papers shadow rendition when exibited in the real world. It is
>> unsetteling, but true. And, we also have the glass, plexiglass that
>> changes things too.
>>
>> I do belive people have talked about this reflection phenomena that
>> may render a glossy prints shadow less dense visually than one on a
>> good matte rag, while showing a far greater dmax when measured
>> scientifically. When you get these glossy prints in a gallery or
>> museum you are talking about even more surface reflections and
>> scattered light.  That is one of the reasons I never get hung up on
>> dmax numbers and when I hear them I take them with a grain of salt.
> I
>> think they are just one thing to look at among many, even the scale
> of
>> an image should be taken into account.
>>
>> John
>>
>>
>> By the way, that Crane MMax is certainly not revolutionary like they
>> claimed. I kind of expeced that was all hype, and its not that
> bright
>> either. It is really where they should have been 5 years ago.
>>
>> John
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> it's down to measurement error, or so close as to be visually the
>>> same) but the more textured surfaces seem to have blacker blacks
> than
>>> PhotoRag. I speculate this is because a smoother surface may
> begin to
>>> have a slight bit of actual though very diffuse reflection or
> sheen of
>>> the ambient light in the room. William Turner, German Etching, and
>>> White Velvet being more textured might break that up more. You
> know,
>>

Hello Tyler,

>...sometimes some paper/ink just seem to have less life than 
>others for reasons hard to quantify.

How true.  Eboni BO on PR just sings.  With K3 I'm having a harder
time finding a setting that I really like.  I'm close, but nothing yet
that gives me the same chills up my spine as the former.


>Without White Velvet I would begin testing the VFA again, they have 
>certain similarities, and you and others are reporting good results.

In the same vein as above, with Eboni BO VFA didn't excite me much,
but with K3 it has moved to my A-List.



>I'll test this new Crane also.  Personally I don't like these 
>smooth papers, but clients do, so I must carry them.
>But how it does with Piezotones is my concern. Before White Velvet 
>we had nothing bright white with a pretty tooth, so it's a good 
>option.

It's worth trying Max, as it has a fine (as in tiny) texture.  And as
Walt has reported, it seems to be extremely scuff and burnish
resistant.  I dug into it with a thumbnail and still couldn't scrape
any ink off.  

Regards,
Clayton


Info on black and white digital printing at    
http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Clayton Jones" 
<cj@c...> wrote:
> 
> It's worth trying Max, as it has a fine (as in tiny) texture.  And as
> Walt has reported, it seems to be extremely scuff and burnish
> resistant.  I dug into it with a thumbnail and still couldn't scrape
> any ink off.  
> 


Similar to German Etching, but maybe slightly more rounded "bumps"

Very interesting discussion about these art papers.  What your your preferred ABW settings 
for VFA (v, h, sh, and hi)?

In general, since the ABW system seems to be very sensitive to small increments and since 
we are uncertain i guess about the logic that underlies the chooser (what are we calling the  
circle thing?), it would be helpful to those of us considering a new paper to have 
suggestions from those of you who are using it.

Thanks

Well.. Thats a Real good question.. hahnemuhle hasnt confirmed that its been
discontinued yet..But I would guess that they will be making some changes as
they do every year at about this time..
as soon as I get word i'll make sure everyone knows!

Cheers
Jim Doyle


J. Doyle Enterprises LLC
114 Old Orchard Rd
Cherry Hill, NJ 08003
856-424-8660
http://www.shadesofpaper.com
AOL IM: Brokerup99

  -----Original Message-----
  From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Tyler
Boley
  Sent: Sunday, November 13, 2005 6:39 PM
  To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
  Subject: [Digital BW] For Tyler Re: Epson Ultrasmooth Fine Art, VFA, HPR .
.


  --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "wwodets"
<odets@c...> wrote:
  ...
  > And what do you think of my speculation on the dmin and USFA?  I
  > think the (relative) dinginess of the HPR makes the blacks look dingy
  > too.

  Makes some sense of course. Anything that widens the scale from paper
white to ink black
  would help. On the other hand, sometimes some paper/ink just seem to have
less life than
  others for reasons hard to quantify.

  ...
  > Also, I looked up White Velvet and apparently Hahnemuhle has stopped
  > making it.  I gather you mostly use the Hahnemuhle papers.  Is that
  > correct?  And what would you go to without the White Velevet?

  I had no idea they dropped White Velvet, recently bought a bunch. Jimmy
Doyle could tell
  us more, it's still on his site.
  I do use mostly H papers, but am moving toward some of the Innova paers as
well. I'm
  trying to drop PhotoRag entirely in favor of Innova PhotoSmooth. They are
nearly
  indistinguishable, with Innova perhpas a bit less flakey, and perhaps less
pricey
  stranglehold on the market. I'll test this new Crane also.
  Personally I don't like these smooth papers, but clients do, so I must
carry them.
  Without White Velvet I would begin testing the VFA again, they have
certain similarities,
  and you and others are reporting good results.
  But how it does with Piezotones is my concern. Before White Velvet we had
nothing bright
  white with a pretty tooth, so it's a good option.
  Tyler





  Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other resources as
they are often being updated.

  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:
  - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep
them short.
  - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames.
Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from the
membership without notice.
  - Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital B&W
printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be removed from
the membership.
  - By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and
guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group Owner and
Moderators. See “Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines” in the Files section:
  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/

  BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT
YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE “OWNER” AND
“MODERATORS” OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU
FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY
DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS,
GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF THE  “OWNER” AND
“MODERATORS” OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE
POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE INABILITY
TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR
ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY
THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER
MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP.




----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS

    a..  Visit your group "DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint" on the web.

    b..  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
     DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

    c..  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--


--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.362 / Virus Database: 267.13.0/167 - Release Date: 11/11/2005


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

Hello,

I use the VFA with all ABW settings neutral.  On the USFA, I have 
been using an h-12 v-16 and all other settings neutral.  The "circle 
thing" on the USFA gives more or less the tonality of the VFA but 
somewhat cooler and might be too cool for some people.  When a single 
print or a set of similar prints are viewed (without side by side 
comparisons) they tend to set their own whitepoint and look "right."  
Lighting, which is highly variable in home, gallery and museum, also 
dramatically changes the whitepoint but in a given situation we 
adjust to that too.  So, unlike Clayton, I don't really pursue 
a "certain look."  I prefer something transparent to the eye and in 
wet printing never used toners, etc.

Walt



--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "rgoldman2" 
<rgoldman@n...> wrote:
>
> 
> Very interesting discussion about these art papers.  What your your 
preferred ABW settings 
> for VFA (v, h, sh, and hi)?
> 
> In general, since the ABW system seems to be very sensitive to 
small increments and since 
> we are uncertain i guess about the logic that underlies the chooser 
(what are we calling the  
> circle thing?), it would be helpful to those of us considering a 
new paper to have 

> suggestions from those of you who are using it.
> 
> Thanks
>

...and much more expensive than Innova Soft Texture which I like better.

john

 
> Similar to German Etching, but maybe slightly more rounded "bumps"
>

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Clayton Jones" <cj@c...> wrote:
...
> >Without White Velvet I would begin testing the VFA again, they have 
> >certain similarities, and you and others are reporting good results.
> 
> In the same vein as above, with Eboni BO VFA didn't excite me much,
> but with K3 it has moved to my A-List.

Hi Clayton, I just read on another list that it's only available up to 13". I'll have to look into 
that, it'll put it out of the running right off the bat.
Tyler

> 
> ...and much more expensive than Innova Soft Texture which I like better.
> 
 
> > Similar to German Etching, but maybe slightly more rounded "bumps"
>

At first I thought Innova Soft Texture was going to be a good substitute for
the PermaJet Alpha that is no longer available in the U.S.  However, they
are not the same.  Alpha is cotton and prints very smoothly.  The last time
I used the Innova Soft Texture (alpha cellulose -- which I'm generally OK
with), it had blotchy dark tones.  So, I'm not sure if the printer and ink
make a difference, but I stopped using it with the MIS UT inks.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

Tyler-

I believe this is true--should have mentioned that!

Walt



--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Tyler Boley" 
<tyler@t...> wrote:
>
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Clayton 
Jones" <cj@c...> wrote:
> ...
> > >Without White Velvet I would begin testing the VFA again, they 
have 
> > >certain similarities, and you and others are reporting good 
results.
> > 
> > In the same vein as above, with Eboni BO VFA didn't excite me 
much,
> > but with K3 it has moved to my A-List.
> 
> Hi Clayton, I just read on another list that it's only available up 
to 13". I'll have to look into 

> that, it'll put it out of the running right off the bat.
> Tyler
>

Do you need to profile VFA for K3 inks to get neutral prints? What paper
setting do you use?

Steve

-----Original Message-----
From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of wwodets
Sent: Monday, November 14, 2005 7:54 AM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Digital BW] Re: ABW Settings for VFA and other preferred papers.

Hello,

I use the VFA with all ABW settings neutral.  On the USFA, I have 
been using an h-12 v-16 and all other settings neutral.  The "circle 
thing" on the USFA gives more or less the tonality of the VFA but 
somewhat cooler and might be too cool for some people.  When a single 
print or a set of similar prints are viewed (without side by side 
comparisons) they tend to set their own whitepoint and look "right."  
Lighting, which is highly variable in home, gallery and museum, also 
dramatically changes the whitepoint but in a given situation we 
adjust to that too.  So, unlike Clayton, I don't really pursue 
a "certain look."  I prefer something transparent to the eye and in 
wet printing never used toners, etc.

Walt



--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "rgoldman2" 
<rgoldman@n...> wrote:
>
> 
> Very interesting discussion about these art papers.  What your your 
preferred ABW settings 
> for VFA (v, h, sh, and hi)?
> 
> In general, since the ABW system seems to be very sensitive to 
small increments and since 
> we are uncertain i guess about the logic that underlies the chooser 
(what are we calling the  
> circle thing?), it would be helpful to those of us considering a 
new paper to have 
> suggestions from those of you who are using it.
> 
> Thanks
>







Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other resources as
they are often being updated.

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:
- As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep
them short.
- Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames.
Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from the
membership without notice.
- Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital B&W
printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be removed from
the membership.
- By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and
guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group Owner and
Moderators. See "Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines" in the Files section:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/

BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT
YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE "OWNER" AND
"MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU
FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY
DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS,
GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF THE  "OWNER" AND
"MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE
POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE INABILITY
TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR
ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY
THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER
MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP.
 
Yahoo! Groups Links

Paul,

That is interesting. I certainly hope that black motteling never
happens with me. I have done a lot of black and white and color work
with the Soft Texture including 40"x60" things with lot of black and I
have never experienced that. I usedd to use German Etching (also alpha
cellulose) for this moderately smooth range of texture and now I use
this. It had better not start screwing up with me. 

John


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark"
<paul.roark@v...> wrote:
>
> > 
> > ...and much more expensive than Innova Soft Texture which I like
better.
> > 
>  
> > > Similar to German Etching, but maybe slightly more rounded "bumps"
> >
> 
> At first I thought Innova Soft Texture was going to be a good
substitute for
> the PermaJet Alpha that is no longer available in the U.S.  However,
they
> are not the same.  Alpha is cotton and prints very smoothly.  The
last time
> I used the Innova Soft Texture (alpha cellulose -- which I'm
generally OK
> with), it had blotchy dark tones.  So, I'm not sure if the printer
and ink

> make a difference, but I stopped using it with the MIS UT inks.
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com
>

Steve-

If by profiling you mean ICC profiling, this shouldn't affect the 
color neutrality of the prints.  Profiling (or curves) as with a RIP 
will certainly affect neutrality, but you wouldn't use a RIP with the 
ABW (which is essentially a RIP).  I have used the VFA setting in the 
ABW driver with VFA.

Walt

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Steve Bye" 
<steve_bye@c...> wrote:
>
> Do you need to profile VFA for K3 inks to get neutral prints? What 
paper
> setting do you use?
> 
> Steve
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of 
wwodets
> Sent: Monday, November 14, 2005 7:54 AM
> To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Digital BW] Re: ABW Settings for VFA and other preferred 
papers.
> 
> Hello,
> 
> I use the VFA with all ABW settings neutral.  On the USFA, I have 
> been using an h-12 v-16 and all other settings neutral.  
The "circle 
> thing" on the USFA gives more or less the tonality of the VFA but 
> somewhat cooler and might be too cool for some people.  When a 
single 
> print or a set of similar prints are viewed (without side by side 
> comparisons) they tend to set their own whitepoint and 
look "right."  
> Lighting, which is highly variable in home, gallery and museum, 
also 
> dramatically changes the whitepoint but in a given situation we 
> adjust to that too.  So, unlike Clayton, I don't really pursue 
> a "certain look."  I prefer something transparent to the eye and in 
> wet printing never used toners, etc.
> 
> Walt
> 
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "rgoldman2" 
> <rgoldman@n...> wrote:
> >
> > 
> > Very interesting discussion about these art papers.  What your 
your 
> preferred ABW settings 
> > for VFA (v, h, sh, and hi)?
> > 
> > In general, since the ABW system seems to be very sensitive to 
> small increments and since 
> > we are uncertain i guess about the logic that underlies the 
chooser 
> (what are we calling the  
> > circle thing?), it would be helpful to those of us considering a 
> new paper to have 
> > suggestions from those of you who are using it.
> > 
> > Thanks
> >
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other 
resources as
> they are often being updated.
> 
> 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:
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages 
to keep
> them short.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or 
flames.
> Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from the
> membership without notice.
> - Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital 
B&W
> printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be 
removed from
> the membership.
> - By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and
> guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group 
Owner and
> Moderators. See "Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines" in the Files 
section:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/
> 
> BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE 
PRINT
> YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE "OWNER" AND
> "MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE 
LIABLE TO YOU
> FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR 
EXEMPLARY
> DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS,
> GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF 
THE  "OWNER" AND
> "MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED 
OF THE
> POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE 
INABILITY
> TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED 
ACCESS TO OR
> ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR 
CONDUCT OF ANY
> THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY 
OTHER

> MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP.
>  
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "john dean" 
<deanwork2003@y...> wrote:
>
> Paul,
> 
> That is interesting. I certainly hope that black motteling never
> happens with me. I have done a lot of black and white and color work
> with the Soft Texture including 40"x60" things with lot of black and I
> have never experienced that. I usedd to use German Etching (also alpha
> cellulose) for this moderately smooth range of texture and now I use
> this. It had better not start screwing up with me. 
>

Ink limits on the Innova papers are slightly more reserved. It doesn't 
seem to handle gross amounts of over inking as well as other papers. If 
you limits are in good order, there shouldn't be any problems like that 
described. At least that is what I find with my inks.

> 
> Ink limits on the Innova papers are slightly more reserved. It doesn't
> seem to handle gross amounts of over inking as well as other papers. If
> you limits are in good order, there shouldn't be any problems like that
> described. At least that is what I find with my inks.
> 

Improper ink loading may well have been what caused the mottling I
mentioned.  Since I most often use the Epson drivers, I'm usually restricted
to the media type settings they have.  Usually this is not a problem.
However, it can be.  I forget which printer I had the problem with --
perhaps the C86, which also has no media type setting that works well with
Moab papers.  I do recall my initial impressions of Innova Soft Texture were
positive.  I'll try a couple of other printers to see if the problem is
printer-specific.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

Hi Paul,

I think Greg is correct here. I am working on a 24"x36" color print
right now today and the background is 100% black and it is rendering
very smooth and deep black tonality there with the Soft Texture. My
clients love it so far. I have only used this paper with a 9600 and UC
inks with QTR and Epson driver for color and on a 10K for color output.

John






--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark"
<paul.roark@v...> wrote:
>
> > 
> > Ink limits on the Innova papers are slightly more reserved. It doesn't
> > seem to handle gross amounts of over inking as well as other
papers. If
> > you limits are in good order, there shouldn't be any problems like
that
> > described. At least that is what I find with my inks.
> > 
> 
> Improper ink loading may well have been what caused the mottling I
> mentioned.  Since I most often use the Epson drivers, I'm usually
restricted
> to the media type settings they have.  Usually this is not a problem.
> However, it can be.  I forget which printer I had the problem with --
> perhaps the C86, which also has no media type setting that works
well with
> Moab papers.  I do recall my initial impressions of Innova Soft
Texture were

> positive.  I'll try a couple of other printers to see if the problem is
> printer-specific.
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com
>