Digital BW, The Print

I've been going through the Wilhelm site to compare glossy papers as I 
want to standardize on a reasonably archival paper for some B&W (R220 
UT-R2) and most of my color work (second R220 MIS PRO).  It looks like 
I'm going to have to order custom profiles for each type of paper I 
choose.  I don't mind paying more for the few prints I like enough to 
print at home, so paper cost isn't a big issue for me.

On Paul Roark's pages for the R220 UT-R2 he listed Epson Premium 
Semigloss as the most archival paper with no uv-brighteners, but under 
the K3 printers on Wilhelm's site, the Semigloss doesn't seem to do as 
well as luster and Epson Premium Glossy and apparently does have 
brighteners.  Under the new Claria printers Wilhelm compares Ultra 
Premium Glossy with Premium Glossy.  I was quite surprised that he 
listed both these as lacking UV brighteners- UPGPP is a *very* bright 
paper.  Their archival performance seems identical according to Wilhelm.

I did not see any mention of Crane Silver Rag, Innova Fibaprint, Fine 
Art Pearl or other new fiber-type papers- is there any data out there 
on how well these papers will last?  Are they likely to perform better 
or worse than standard Epson glossy and semi-glossy papers with pigment 
inks?

Any information would be appreciated.

>... going through the Wilhelm site to compare glossy ...

>On Paul Roark's pages for the R220 UT-R2 he listed Epson 
>Premium Semigloss as the most archival paper with 
>no uv-brighteners, but under the K3 printers on 
>Wilhelm's site, the Semigloss doesn't seem to do as 
>well as luster and Epson Premium Glossy and apparently 
>does have brighteners.

See http://www.wilhelm-research.com/epson/R2400.html, where the Semigloss is
listed as having no UV Brighteners.  (No lightfastness figures are given.)

Most of the k3 printer tests list only the Semi-MATTE paper.  That is a
different paper and does have brighteners.  It is available in rolls and is
what I do sometimes use on my 7500 because of that and the semi-matte finish
I prefer.

I did not do any relative fade tests for the different Epson Premium Glossy,
Semigloss, Luster, and Semimatte papers as far as I can remember.  My
comment probably related to the fact that they were among the few glossy
papers at the time of that I worked with that printer that had buffered
paper, as opposed to acidic paper that can be expected to yellow in 30
years.

Wilhelm's tests typically give Premium Glossy excellent ratings.  I just
don't like the glossy surface or bronzing.  I don't believe I listed this or
the UPGPP as not having brighteners.  They clearly do.  By the way, the
brighteners do not seem to shorten the lives of these paper in Wilhelm
tests.  Brighteners are generally dyes that will fade rather quickly and
give the appearance of yellowing the paper.  That is one reason I'm not
enthusiastic about them.  The market clearly likes them, however, as they do
make the print appear to be brighter and have a higher dynamic range.

I do not have any fade data on the newer glossy papers like Crane Silver
Rag.  However, they do have good, buffered paper bases.  I expect them to be
very good.  

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

Thanks Paul, you're right about the semigloss not having brighteners-
 I must have mixed it up with semimatte.

>  I did not do any relative fade tests for the different Epson 
>Premium Glossy, Semigloss, Luster, and Semimatte papers as far as I 
>can remember.  My comment probably related to the fact that they 
>were among the few glossy papers at the time of that I worked with 
>that printer that had buffered  paper, as opposed to acidic paper 
>that can be expected to yellow in 30 years.
 
> Wilhelm's tests typically give Premium Glossy excellent ratings.  
> I just don't like the glossy surface or bronzing.  I don't believe 
>I listed this or the UPGPP as not having brighteners.  

Oddly, if you look at the Wilhelm pages for the Claria printers 
these two papers are listed as not having brighteners.
See the Epson R380:
http://www.wilhelm-research.com/epson/WIR_EpR380_2006_11_29.pdf

For the R800 he compares Premium Glossy to Premium Luster and the 
Premium Glossy has a lot more life under glass.  I don't like that 
paper either.
http://www.wilhelm-research.com/epson/WIR_EpR380_2006_11_29.pdf

Is the testing reliable I wonder?
 
> I do not have any fade data on the newer glossy papers like Crane 
> Silver Rag.  However, they do have good, buffered paper bases.  I 
> expect them to be very good.  

I wonder how the Fibaprint will look when the UV brighteners fade- 
pleasantly creamy like Silver Rag or yellow?

Has anyone tried any fade testing?  I'll try to do something myself 
but was hoping somebody was already doing this.

I think I asked this question before.  Does anyone know any difference, 
besides thickness and cut sheet sizes available, between Epson Premium 
Semigloss and Epson Pro Semigloss?

I have been to the Wilhelm site and Epson's site and, although I may be 
missing something, I can't find the answer.

Thank you.

Nancy

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Roger" 
<rsmith02@...> wrote:
>
> Thanks Paul, you're right about the semigloss not having brighteners-

> >  I did not do any relative fade tests for the different Epson 
> >Premium Glossy, Semigloss, Luster, and Semimatte papers as far as I 

Hi Paul and others, I don't know if you saw this but Wilhelm posted the 
Epson 3800 tests and it included Premium Glossy, Luster, Semi-Matte and 
others and also with ABW mode.
http://www.wilhelm-research.com/epson/WIR_Ep3800_2006_09_25.pdf