Digital BW, The Print

I picked up some Crane Portfolio Rag samples to try. It a beautiful
paper, and I have high hopes for it. However, all I'm getting for DMAX
is 1.54 using Cone K7 inks.

Is this consistent with the results of others? What kind of DMAX (K7
inks or otherwise) are the rest of you getting?

For reference I get about the same (1.55) with Premier Art Hot Press
but Innova Smooth Cotton & Soft Texture Art are significantly higher
at 1.64.

Thanks,

Terry.

I can't remember what I  got on it, but it was certainly not up to
what we normally expect and I bagged it. Check all your densities
between 90% and 100%, it shoulders over and you may find a limit spot
with higher density.
Fail to see what people like about this paper compared to the options,
other than it's tough coating. Pretty low total ink capability as
well. Very persistent hard curl from rolls.

Other than all that, gorgeous stuff! <G>

Tyler

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Terry Ritz"
<t.ritz@...> wrote:

>
> I picked up some Crane Portfolio Rag samples to try. It a beautiful
> paper, and I have high hopes for it. However, all I'm getting for DMAX
> is 1.54 using Cone K7 inks.
> 
> Is this consistent with the results of others? What kind of DMAX (K7
> inks or otherwise) are the rest of you getting?
> 
> For reference I get about the same (1.55) with Premier Art Hot Press
> but Innova Smooth Cotton & Soft Texture Art are significantly higher
> at 1.64.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Terry.
>

I'm looking for a paper with a nice, smooth surface for portrait work
and reproducing artwork (pencil drawings). This is where PAHP and
Portfolio Rag have came in. It's been a while since I tried HPR, but
maybe I should try a few sheets. There's something about Innova Smooth
Cotton Bright White that doesn't quite work for me (paper tone?) but
it's certainly an option.

Other suggestions?

Portfolio Rag has a very low ink load, lower than anything else I've
used. I do like the surface and tone of the paper, although something
a bit warmer might be nice. The low DMAX is an issue however.

Terry.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Tyler Boley"
<tyler@...> wrote:

>
> I can't remember what I  got on it, but it was certainly not up to
> what we normally expect and I bagged it. Check all your densities
> between 90% and 100%, it shoulders over and you may find a limit spot
> with higher density.
> Fail to see what people like about this paper compared to the options,
> other than it's tough coating. Pretty low total ink capability as
> well. Very persistent hard curl from rolls.
> 
> Other than all that, gorgeous stuff! <G>
> 
> Tyler
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Terry Ritz"
> <t.ritz@> wrote:
> >
> > I picked up some Crane Portfolio Rag samples to try. It a beautiful
> > paper, and I have high hopes for it. However, all I'm getting for DMAX
> > is 1.54 using Cone K7 inks.
> > 
> > Is this consistent with the results of others? What kind of DMAX (K7
> > inks or otherwise) are the rest of you getting?
> > 
> > For reference I get about the same (1.55) with Premier Art Hot Press
> > but Innova Smooth Cotton & Soft Texture Art are significantly higher
> > at 1.64.
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > 
> > Terry.
> >
>

Terry,

Using 4800 with K7 and ABW I am getting a much better dmax on Portfolio rag
extra smooth, I am getting 1.64 (using the Textured Fine Art paper setting).
This is better than I get with Hahnemule Portfolio Rag (1.59), not as good
as Velvet Fine Art (1.76).

I quite like the paper.

Mike


On 01/08/07, Terry Ritz <t.ritz@...> wrote:
>
>   I'm looking for a paper with a nice, smooth surface for portrait work
> and reproducing artwork (pencil drawings). This is where PAHP and
> Portfolio Rag have came in. It's been a while since I tried HPR, but
> maybe I should try a few sheets. There's something about Innova Smooth
> Cotton Bright White that doesn't quite work for me (paper tone?) but
> it's certainly an option.
>
> Other suggestions?
>
> Portfolio Rag has a very low ink load, lower than anything else I've
> used. I do like the surface and tone of the paper, although something
> a bit warmer might be nice. The low DMAX is an issue however.
>
> Terry.
>
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com<DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint%40yahoogroups.com>,
> "Tyler Boley"
> <tyler@...> wrote:
> >
> > I can't remember what I got on it, but it was certainly not up to
> > what we normally expect and I bagged it. Check all your densities
> > between 90% and 100%, it shoulders over and you may find a limit spot
> > with higher density.
> > Fail to see what people like about this paper compared to the options,
> > other than it's tough coating. Pretty low total ink capability as
> > well. Very persistent hard curl from rolls.
> >
> > Other than all that, gorgeous stuff! <G>
> >
> > Tyler
> >
> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com<DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint%40yahoogroups.com>,
> "Terry Ritz"
> > <t.ritz@> wrote:
> > >
> > > I picked up some Crane Portfolio Rag samples to try. It a beautiful
> > > paper, and I have high hopes for it. However, all I'm getting for DMAX
> > > is 1.54 using Cone K7 inks.
> > >
> > > Is this consistent with the results of others? What kind of DMAX (K7
> > > inks or otherwise) are the rest of you getting?
> > >
> > > For reference I get about the same (1.55) with Premier Art Hot Press
> > > but Innova Smooth Cotton & Soft Texture Art are significantly higher
> > > at 1.64.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Terry.
> > >
> >
>
>  
>


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

Just to clarify I am using standard Epson inks with ABW mode not K7 sorry
for the confusion.
One glass of wine too many by 9pm :)

Mike


On 01/08/07, Michael King <drmrking@...> wrote:
>
> Terry,
>
> Using 4800 with K7 and ABW I am getting a much better dmax on Portfolio
> rag extra smooth, I am getting 1.64 (using the Textured Fine Art paper
> setting). This is better than I get with Hahnemule Portfolio Rag ( 1.59),
> not as good as Velvet Fine Art (1.76).
>
> I quite like the paper.
>
> Mike
>
>
>  On 01/08/07, Terry Ritz <t.ritz@...> wrote:
> >
> >   I'm looking for a paper with a nice, smooth surface for portrait work
> > and reproducing artwork (pencil drawings). This is where PAHP and
> > Portfolio Rag have came in. It's been a while since I tried HPR, but
> > maybe I should try a few sheets. There's something about Innova Smooth
> > Cotton Bright White that doesn't quite work for me (paper tone?) but
> > it's certainly an option.
> >
> > Other suggestions?
> >
> > Portfolio Rag has a very low ink load, lower than anything else I've
> > used. I do like the surface and tone of the paper, although something
> > a bit warmer might be nice. The low DMAX is an issue however.
> >
> > Terry.
> >
> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com<DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint%40yahoogroups.com>,
> > "Tyler Boley"
> > <tyler@...> wrote:
> > >
> > > I can't remember what I got on it, but it was certainly not up to
> > > what we normally expect and I bagged it. Check all your densities
> > > between 90% and 100%, it shoulders over and you may find a limit spot
> > > with higher density.
> > > Fail to see what people like about this paper compared to the options,
> > > other than it's tough coating. Pretty low total ink capability as
> > > well. Very persistent hard curl from rolls.
> > >
> > > Other than all that, gorgeous stuff! <G>
> > >
> > > Tyler
> > >
> > > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com<DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint%40yahoogroups.com>,
> > "Terry Ritz"
> > > <t.ritz@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I picked up some Crane Portfolio Rag samples to try. It a beautiful
> > > > paper, and I have high hopes for it. However, all I'm getting for
> > DMAX
> > > > is 1.54 using Cone K7 inks.
> > > >
> > > > Is this consistent with the results of others? What kind of DMAX (K7
> > > > inks or otherwise) are the rest of you getting?
> > > >
> > > > For reference I get about the same ( 1.55) with Premier Art Hot
> > Press
> > > > but Innova Smooth Cotton & Soft Texture Art are significantly higher
> > > > at 1.64.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > >
> > > > Terry.
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >  
> >
>
>


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

Interesting. . . .  I'm using a 2200 and QTR. I'll have to look
closely at my step wedge under a loop and perhaps play with the Gray
Overlap parameter in QTR. I should also cross-post this to the QTR group.

Thanks. . .  very helpful info.

Terry.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Michael King"
<drmrking@...> wrote:
>
> Terry,
> 
> Using 4800 with K7 and ABW I am getting a much better dmax on
Portfolio rag
> extra smooth, I am getting 1.64 (using the Textured Fine Art paper
setting).
> This is better than I get with Hahnemule Portfolio Rag (1.59), not
as good

> as Velvet Fine Art (1.76).
> 
> I quite like the paper.
> 
> Mike

That's too bad!!  ;-)  Guess you can ignor my last post, although I
will look at my 100% black patch more closely.

Terry.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Michael King"
<drmrking@...> wrote:
>
> Just to clarify I am using standard Epson inks with ABW mode not K7
sorry
> for the confusion.
> One glass of wine too many by 9pm :)
> 
> Mike
> 
> 
> On 01/08/07, Michael King <drmrking@...> wrote:
> >
> > Terry,
> >
> > Using 4800 with K7 and ABW I am getting a much better dmax on
Portfolio
> > rag extra smooth, I am getting 1.64 (using the Textured Fine Art paper
> > setting). This is better than I get with Hahnemule Portfolio Rag (
1.59),

> > not as good as Velvet Fine Art (1.76).
> >
> > I quite like the paper.
> >
> > Mike

You should be able to get at least as good if not better dmax with Crane
than Hahnemule.

On 01/08/07, Terry Ritz <t.ritz@...> wrote:
>
>   That's too bad!! ;-) Guess you can ignor my last post, although I
> will look at my 100% black patch more closely.
>
> Terry.
>
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com<DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint%40yahoogroups.com>,
> "Michael King"
> <drmrking@...> wrote:
> >
> > Just to clarify I am using standard Epson inks with ABW mode not K7
> sorry
> > for the confusion.
> > One glass of wine too many by 9pm :)
> >
> > Mike
> >
> >
> > On 01/08/07, Michael King <drmrking@...> wrote:
> > >
> > > Terry,
> > >
> > > Using 4800 with K7 and ABW I am getting a much better dmax on
> Portfolio
> > > rag extra smooth, I am getting 1.64 (using the Textured Fine Art paper
> > > setting). This is better than I get with Hahnemule Portfolio Rag (
> 1.59),
> > > not as good as Velvet Fine Art (1.76).
> > >
> > > I quite like the paper.
> > >
> > > Mike
>
> 
>


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

I've been using Innova papers and it's been a while since I tried any
HPR. I'll have to pick up a few sheets of Photo Rag to see what I get. 

This may also be an ink/paper combo issue, as I know Tyler uses Cone
inks. However, I'm not sure if he used K7 or the older Cone inks when
he tried out Portfolio Rag.

Terry.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Michael King"
<drmrking@...> wrote:

>
> You should be able to get at least as good if not better dmax with Crane
> than Hahnemule.
>

He uses the older Cone Quad inks, plus another portfolio black as an
underprinted kicker. But this is all through Studio Print.

I've used a couple of rolls of the Crane Portfolio Rag and personally
like it. Especially for use with the Cone K7 Sepia inks. That is a
very nice combination. It is a natural paper with no oba content, so
it is less white than Photo Rag. This Portfolio Rag is a really nice
smooth sharp paper though and is wonderful for small warm prints in my
opinion. My dmax is slightly less than Photorag with K7 Cone neutrals
and sepia but not really noticeable to me.

The deal with all the Crane matte rag papers is that they bottom out
on ink limits very quickly. So, they absolutely need to be carefully
linearized for the given inkset and printer. With all the Hahnemuhle
papers and most of the Innova matte papers you can throw a lot of pure
black at them and not get motteling. Not so with Crane. Too much ink
and your dmax reverses quickly. If you are making a curve with QTR,
limit the ink.

John




> This may also be an ink/paper combo issue, as I know Tyler uses Cone
> inks. However, I'm not sure if he used K7 or the older Cone inks when
> he tried out Portfolio Rag.
> 
> Terry.
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Michael King"
> <drmrking@> wrote:
> >
> > You should be able to get at least as good if not better dmax with
Crane

> > than Hahnemule.
> >
>

and same result with UCK3 as well.
Tyler

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

>
> He uses the older Cone Quad inks, plus another portfolio black as an
> underprinted kicker. But this is all through Studio Print.
> 
> I've used a couple of rolls of the Crane Portfolio Rag and personally
> like it. Especially for use with the Cone K7 Sepia inks. That is a
> very nice combination. It is a natural paper with no oba content, so
> it is less white than Photo Rag. This Portfolio Rag is a really nice
> smooth sharp paper though and is wonderful for small warm prints in my
> opinion. My dmax is slightly less than Photorag with K7 Cone neutrals
> and sepia but not really noticeable to me.
> 
> The deal with all the Crane matte rag papers is that they bottom out
> on ink limits very quickly. So, they absolutely need to be carefully
> linearized for the given inkset and printer. With all the Hahnemuhle
> papers and most of the Innova matte papers you can throw a lot of pure
> black at them and not get motteling. Not so with Crane. Too much ink
> and your dmax reverses quickly. If you are making a curve with QTR,
> limit the ink.
> 
> John
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > This may also be an ink/paper combo issue, as I know Tyler uses Cone
> > inks. However, I'm not sure if he used K7 or the older Cone inks when
> > he tried out Portfolio Rag.
> > 
> > Terry.
> > 
> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Michael King"
> > <drmrking@> wrote:
> > >
> > > You should be able to get at least as good if not better dmax with
> Crane
> > > than Hahnemule.
> > >
> >
>