Digital BW, The Print

Has anyone tried Crane Museao Max 365 gsm sheet paper?  If so, what do 
you think of it?  What about Dmax and deep rich blacks?  How does it 
compare to other higher quality fine art matte papers.

Your feedback is appreciated.  The more details the better.

Thanks,

Lou Dina

Dmax is similar to many of the other high end papers, around 1.65-
1.70, I don't remember the exact value I got when I tested it. The 
paper white makes a large curve from low at blue up to red, it never 
does level off. Texture is similar (or slightly more) to German 
Etching, visually the paper white is pretty close to many of the 
Hahnemuhle papers. Color gamut looks slightly smaller than most of 
the Hahnemuhle papers, but that also might have been slightly off 
from a missed ink limit. Ink limits are lower than most of the 
Hahnemuhle papers, so be careful if making curves for QTR or another 
RIP. It seems like a nice thick paper that stays relatively flat.

Also dot gain looks to be more than German Etching, which doesn't 
really help you if you are using an older printer.

initial testing showed a lower dmax with Piezotone inks than the H papers, but UC MK 
showed a very slightly higher dmax. After seeing this and what seemed to be bleeding at 
much lower total ink percentages than other papers, I stopped testing. Also very high dot 
gain as noted.
Atractive paper and surface though.
With  linearizable RIP to control dot gain, total ink, and limiting, color with UCs would be 
worth looking at.
But considering price and other available options I'm leaving it aside for now.
Tyler

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Louis Dina" <lbdina@c...> wrote:

>
> Has anyone tried Crane Museao Max 365 gsm sheet paper?  If so, what do 
> you think of it?  What about Dmax and deep rich blacks?  How does it 
> compare to other higher quality fine art matte papers.
> 
> Your feedback is appreciated.  The more details the better.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Lou Dina
>

Thanks for your comments.  I didn't post my initial findings with my 
original query since I didn't want to skew any responses.

I bought a box of this paper and ran a few tests using a 4000 and UC 
inks, using an RGB generated grayscale and some color patches.  I was 
going to profile it for color work, then if I liked it, for B&W.  The 
best Dmax I got from this paper, using the Epson driver, was 1.55, 
which I considered pretty anemic, especially for the price.  I tried a 
few different paper settings in the driver.  Crane suggested the EEM 
setting, which I tried, but I also tried the VFA setting, both at 1440 
dpi, SuperX microweave, No Color Adjustment, and all the high speed and 
edge smoothing features turned off.  I also downloaded their custom 
profile for the 4000.  It was weaker yet.

Maybe there is a better paper setting in the driver that will lay down 
a more optimum amount of ink??  

Any other thoughts would be appreciated.  I suspect it is the nature of 
the paper, but there may be some settings I can tweak.

Lou Dina

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Louis Dina" 
<lbdina@c...> wrote:
>
> Has anyone tried Crane Museao Max 365 gsm sheet paper?  If so, what 
do 

> you think of it?  What about Dmax and deep rich blacks?  How does it 
> compare to other higher quality fine art matte papers.
> 
> Your feedback is appreciated.  The more details the better.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Lou Dina
>

Lou,
On the 2200 with UC color, I found Dmax peak (~1.65)
at untagged rgb 30,30,30 using VFA setting.  Below
that it goes back up.  Reducing the ink in the driver
kills the color saturation.  I believe it is due to
the MK reaching Dmax with a lower ink load than
typical, and having a much higher density vs ink
slope.  IMO, this paper requires a RIP to show its
full potential.  Too bad for Crane...

Best regards,
John Moody

--- Louis Dina <lbdina@...> wrote:

> Thanks for your comments.  I didn't post my initial
> findings with my 
> original query since I didn't want to skew any
> responses.
> 
> I bought a box of this paper and ran a few tests
> using a 4000 and UC 
> inks, using an RGB generated grayscale and some
> color patches.  I was 
> going to profile it for color work, then if I liked
> it, for B&W.  The 
> best Dmax I got from this paper, using the Epson
> driver, was 1.55, 
> which I considered pretty anemic, especially for the
> price.  I tried a 
> few different paper settings in the driver.  Crane
> suggested the EEM 
> setting, which I tried, but I also tried the VFA
> setting, both at 1440 
> dpi, SuperX microweave, No Color Adjustment, and all
> the high speed and 
> edge smoothing features turned off.  I also
> downloaded their custom 
> profile for the 4000.  It was weaker yet.
> 
> Maybe there is a better paper setting in the driver
> that will lay down 
> a more optimum amount of ink??  
> 
> Any other thoughts would be appreciated.  I suspect
> it is the nature of 
> the paper, but there may be some settings I can
> tweak.
> 
> Lou Dina
>

I think you are right on target there John.This is a paper that needs
a perfect profile. I did get some very nice prints with it last night
in a QTR demo for my class. It is a nice texture with good tonal
seperation, but I've also found that it doesn't take deep blacks as
easily as the Innova or Hahnemuhle papers, and the dmax is no
different really and it isn't cheap. There was a similar situation
with the original Crane Museo which was very limited in the amount of
ink you could throw at it. Let us hope the as yet unreleased Silver
Rag is the one product that will put Crane on the map for innovative
inkjet media. Museo Max is just a little above average in my opinion
and Tyler's tests show that. The one thing I don't know yet is how
tough the surface is. If its surface is really tougher than the others
it could be a good candidate for book projects. I don't know yet. 

John



--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, John Moody
<moodymz3@y...> wrote:

>
> Lou,
> On the 2200 with UC color, I found Dmax peak (~1.65)
> at untagged rgb 30,30,30 using VFA setting.  Below
> that it goes back up.  Reducing the ink in the driver
> kills the color saturation.  I believe it is due to
> the MK reaching Dmax with a lower ink load than
> typical, and having a much higher density vs ink
> slope.  IMO, this paper requires a RIP to show its
> full potential.  Too bad for Crane...
> 
> Best regards,
> John Moody
> 
> --- Louis Dina <lbdina@c...> wrote:
> 
> > Thanks for your comments.  I didn't post my initial
> > findings with my 
> > original query since I didn't want to skew any
> > responses.
> > 
> > I bought a box of this paper and ran a few tests
> > using a 4000 and UC 
> > inks, using an RGB generated grayscale and some
> > color patches.  I was 
> > going to profile it for color work, then if I liked
> > it, for B&W.  The 
> > best Dmax I got from this paper, using the Epson
> > driver, was 1.55, 
> > which I considered pretty anemic, especially for the
> > price.  I tried a 
> > few different paper settings in the driver.  Crane
> > suggested the EEM 
> > setting, which I tried, but I also tried the VFA
> > setting, both at 1440 
> > dpi, SuperX microweave, No Color Adjustment, and all
> > the high speed and 
> > edge smoothing features turned off.  I also
> > downloaded their custom 
> > profile for the 4000.  It was weaker yet.
> > 
> > Maybe there is a better paper setting in the driver
> > that will lay down 
> > a more optimum amount of ink??  
> > 
> > Any other thoughts would be appreciated.  I suspect
> > it is the nature of 
> > the paper, but there may be some settings I can
> > tweak.
> > 
> > Lou Dina
> >
>

Thanks for the additional feedback.  I suspect you are all correct.  A 
RIP probably is required, since this paper accepts ink differently from 
most of the available paper settings in the Epson driver.  I profiled 
the original Crane Museo for a friend awhile back and the blacks were 
very weak.  I was hoping Museo Max was better.

As a starting point, I always print a gray stepwedge and a series of 
color blocks (using an RGB file and the Epson driver) trying various 
paper and quality settings before printing a profiling target.  Once I 
have the setting that gives me the best overall result and Dmax, I use 
those settings to print the final profiling target for measuring.  In 
the step wedge on Museo Max, I measured multiple steps and my darkest 
step (RGB 0,0,0) actually gave me the best Dmax of all the steps, at 
about 1.55.  That was after letting it dry overnight.

Thanks again.

Lou

I could check durability when I get home. I have a couple of prints 
where I made a mistake in the RIP, and they did not print correctly, so 
i could scrape one of those and see what kind of damage is done. 
Eventually I'll give it a water test too, just too see what happens. If 
the dots didn't spread out so much, I might consider it, but it isn't 
my best looking paper for that reason.

I honestly think we've reached about as much performance as we can
expect from the coated art papers. There may be durability
improvements, and minor creeping towards hight ink loads, gamut, and
dmax. But nothing really significant.
I think the next jump in these areas will be ink. Make a dye print on
any of these lovely papers and it puts all these pigs we're using to
shame, it's far from subtle. Obvioulsy it has little longevity, but it
clearly shows the huge visual compromise we've made for print life.
Tyler

Hi Lou,

I don't know what targets you use to make profiles with, but I saw 
these were released today by Atkinson and thought you (or anyone else 
here) may be interested in them:

http://homepage.mac.com/billatkinson/FileSharing2.html

Enjoy!

Scott

Thanks, Scott.  

For RGB color profiles and the Epson driver, I usually use the 918 RGB 
target supplied by Gretag (which Bill Atkinson actually created).  He 
has dozens of new RGB and CMYK targets, some of which are many shades 
of gray.  I downloaded the ones for the Eye One.  

Thanks for thinking of me.

Regards, Lou

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

>
> Hi Lou,
> 
> I don't know what targets you use to make profiles with, but I saw 
> these were released today by Atkinson and thought you (or anyone else 
> here) may be interested in them:
> 
> http://homepage.mac.com/billatkinson/FileSharing2.html
> 
> Enjoy!
> 
> Scott
>

John,

>The one thing I don't know yet is how tough the surface is. If 
>its surface is really tougher than the others it could be a good
>candidate for book projects. 

I've found it to very scuff resistant in my tests for the "Paper
Chase" review, and also mentioned that it would be good for a book
project.  I scraped it hard with a fingernail and couldn't get it to
scuff.  From reading the various reports it's dmax sems to vary more
than most with different inks.  I tested it only with Eboni.  It's an
attractive paper.  There are more details in the review re paper
color, etc.

Regards,
Clayton


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

I received a call directly from Crane today regarding my concern 
about Dmax on Museo Max.  I spoke to a very knowledgeable, capable 
guy who was forthright.  I'd say he had expert, in depth knowledge.

He actually agreed that his results with the Epson driver were a bit 
sub-par and agreed with my findings.  He did say that shadows using 
the UC color inks didn't exhibit the Dmax I wanted, but that using 
more MK provides excellent Dmax with a RIP.  With a CMYK RIP, you can 
control these variables, but the driver does what it does.  It was 
refreshing to hear a vendor actually speaking straight instead of in 
riddles.

He told me he would do some in depth experimentation and testing with 
the Epson driver and if he finds the right combo that makes this 
paper sing, he will get back to me.  For a change, in this jaded 
world, I actually believe him.  If I find we uncover the magic combo, 
I will be sure to post it here.

Regards,

Lou

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Clayton Jones" 
<cj@c...> wrote:
>
> John,
> 
> >The one thing I don't know yet is how tough the surface is. If 
> >its surface is really tougher than the others it could be a good
> >candidate for book projects. 
> 
> I've found it to very scuff resistant in my tests for the "Paper
> Chase" review, and also mentioned that it would be good for a book
> project.  I scraped it hard with a fingernail and couldn't get it to
> scuff.  From reading the various reports it's dmax sems to vary more
> than most with different inks.  I tested it only with Eboni.  It's 
an

> attractive paper.  There are more details in the review re paper
> color, etc.
> 
> Regards,
> Clayton
> 
> 
> Info on black and white digital printing at    
> http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm
>

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Louis Dina" 
<lbdina@c...> wrote:
> He actually agreed that his results with the Epson driver were a 
bit 
> sub-par and agreed with my findings.  He did say that shadows using 
> the UC color inks didn't exhibit the Dmax I wanted, but that using 
> more MK provides excellent Dmax with a RIP.  With a CMYK RIP, you 
can 
> control these variables, but the driver does what it does.  It was 
> refreshing to hear a vendor actually speaking straight instead of 
in 
> riddles.
> 
> He told me he would do some in depth experimentation and testing 
with 
> the Epson driver and if he finds the right combo that makes this 
> paper sing, he will get back to me.  For a change, in this jaded 
> world, I actually believe him.  If I find we uncover the magic 
combo, 
> I will be sure to post it here.
> 


Yes this does seem very refreshing from the normal "run around" that 
we have come to expect.

Just for clarification, what I was able to get with my RIP was an 
L=15.77, which if ColorshopX is correct, the same patch measured to a 
density of 1.68 k status T with my i1 rev A spectro. This was on the 
thinner 250gsm version, so the 365 might be slightly different. That 
value was for the black ink only, through my RIP, measured from the 
linearization target. The density slowly reversed to a 1.55 as more 
ink was applied. Most of the innova papers I was able to push to the 
same dmax, and most of the Hanemuhle papers can be pushed to a little 
more, around 1.72-1.74. Real working dmax for the Max and Innova 
papers is closer to 1.66, and 1.69 or so for the Hahnemuhle papers. 
So it is right in the ballpark with all the rest for me.

In over inked areas, scuff resistance in nil. In normal inked areas, 
it is only slightly better than the Hahnemuhle papers (with my inks). 
This was tested on a print that has dried for about 1 week. And as I 
said earlier, I'll probably give it a bath this weekend to see how it 
likes water.

I think it was said earlier today that we've probably "maxed" out any
matte papers potential in regard to total shadow density. There is
only so black these current pigments can go without a major
reformulation (lets keep the dyes out please). I think they've done
the best they can, and it's about the same as the others in it's
class. Quality it is, revolutionary, its not.

John




--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Louis Dina"
<lbdina@c...> wrote:

>
> I received a call directly from Crane today regarding my concern 
> about Dmax on Museo Max.  I spoke to a very knowledgeable, capable 
> guy who was forthright.  I'd say he had expert, in depth knowledge.
> 
> He actually agreed that his results with the Epson driver were a bit 
> sub-par and agreed with my findings.  He did say that shadows using 
> the UC color inks didn't exhibit the Dmax I wanted, but that using 
> more MK provides excellent Dmax with a RIP.  With a CMYK RIP, you can 
> control these variables, but the driver does what it does.  It was 
> refreshing to hear a vendor actually speaking straight instead of in 
> riddles.
> 
> He told me he would do some in depth experimentation and testing with 
> the Epson driver and if he finds the right combo that makes this 
> paper sing, he will get back to me.  For a change, in this jaded 
> world, I actually believe him.  If I find we uncover the magic combo, 
> I will be sure to post it here.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Lou
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Clayton Jones" 
> <cj@c...> wrote:
> >
> > John,
> > 
> > >The one thing I don't know yet is how tough the surface is. If 
> > >its surface is really tougher than the others it could be a good
> > >candidate for book projects. 
> > 
> > I've found it to very scuff resistant in my tests for the "Paper
> > Chase" review, and also mentioned that it would be good for a book
> > project.  I scraped it hard with a fingernail and couldn't get it to
> > scuff.  From reading the various reports it's dmax sems to vary more
> > than most with different inks.  I tested it only with Eboni.  It's 
> an
> > attractive paper.  There are more details in the review re paper
> > color, etc.
> > 
> > Regards,
> > Clayton
> > 
> > 
> > Info on black and white digital printing at    
> > http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm
> >
>

I've been running some Museo Max on the 2200 with QTR (ebony black and UC
inks)for a short while now and while I don't think it's the magic bullet, I
do find it one of the better papers (apart from texture being close to a
touch to much for my taste).

I'm a bit mystified by some of the comments here though.

I really haven't had to fiddle with all sorts of different settings to get a
range of tones that is close to what I get with other papers or struggle
with the black etc. Apart from tweaking the shadow and midtones adjustment,
it's been pretty much plug and play for excellent results.

One quick thought - no intention to teach my grandmother to suck eggs...
but - people are printing on the correct side of the paper? It's coated on
both sides, but only one side has the D Max coating.

tim a

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Timothy 
Atherton" <tim@K...> wrote:
> 
> I'm a bit mystified by some of the comments here though.
> 
> I really haven't had to fiddle with all sorts of different settings 
to get a
> range of tones that is close to what I get with other papers or 
struggle
> with the black etc. Apart from tweaking the shadow and midtones 
adjustment,
> it's been pretty much plug and play for excellent results.
> 

We pretty much decided that the low dmax comes from Epson ink, and 
that inks like Eboni do much better with this paper without much 
fiddling.

Hi Doug.

> We pretty much decided that the low dmax comes from Epson ink, and 
> that inks like Eboni do much better with this paper without much 
> fiddling.

Are you referring specifically to Epson UC inks with Museo Max or is 
this a generic observation?  The more specific your comments, the 
better.

I spoke to a representative at Crane about my low Dmax on Museo Max the 
other day, and he acknowledged that CMY builds do, in fact, result in 
low Dmax on this paper. He said that using more "MK" ink in the deeper 
tones makes a huge difference.  Since I am using the Epson driver, I 
can't control this, but a full featured RIP would probably bring out 
the best in this paper if his comment is accurate.  I tend to believe 
what he said based on the overall tone of our conversation.  

I'm still trying to get this stuff to sing.  I'd be willing to try MIS 
Ebony if you can give me more specifics.  

Thanks,

Lou Dina

This appears to hold true for other 3rd party cotton rag papers as  
well.  See my comparison here for Epson 2400 MK and MIS Eboni:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/message/70648

On Dec 4, 2005, at 6:18 PM, Greg wrote:

> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Timothy
> Atherton" <tim@K...> wrote:
>>
>> I'm a bit mystified by some of the comments here though.
>>
>> I really haven't had to fiddle with all sorts of different settings
> to get a
>> range of tones that is close to what I get with other papers or
> struggle
>> with the black etc. Apart from tweaking the shadow and midtones
> adjustment,
>> it's been pretty much plug and play for excellent results.
>>
>
> We pretty much decided that the low dmax comes from Epson ink, and
> that inks like Eboni do much better with this paper without much
> fiddling.

My experience with Museo Max seems to be quite different from many of
the comment.  I'm printing on an Epson 4000 with US inks using QTR on
a Mac.

With very minor tweeking of the HPR curves I am getting outstanding
results.  The blacks (as judged by eye) are at least as good as any
other high-end paper I've used.  Not only that, they are the most
uniform; no mottling as with some other papers.  This was extremely
important to me since many of my images have solid black backgrounds.
(See Galler I at my website: www.photographybysteele.com)

The paper seems to be more flake and scuff resistent than any paper
I've ever used.

Also the packaging is superb.  Each individual sheet is separated by a
slip sheet.

The paper sort of reminds me of a slightly whiter German Etching.  I'm
sure with a little more tweeking I can improve on the reults I'm
currently obtaining.

My comments for what they're worth.

Jim


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Timothy
Atherton" <tim@K...> wrote:
>
> I've been running some Museo Max on the 2200 with QTR (ebony black
and UC
> inks)for a short while now and while I don't think it's the magic
bullet, I
> do find it one of the better papers (apart from texture being close to a
> touch to much for my taste).
> 
> I'm a bit mystified by some of the comments here though.
> 
> I really haven't had to fiddle with all sorts of different settings
to get a
> range of tones that is close to what I get with other papers or struggle
> with the black etc. Apart from tweaking the shadow and midtones
adjustment,
> it's been pretty much plug and play for excellent results.
> 
> One quick thought - no intention to teach my grandmother to suck eggs...
> but - people are printing on the correct side of the paper? It's
coated on

> both sides, but only one side has the D Max coating.
> 
> tim a
>

> 
> The paper sort of reminds me of a slightly whiter German Etching.  

Compared side by side, German Etching is slightly more white. But Museo 
Max is brighter (whiter) than some of the Innova papers.