Re: [QuadtoneRIP] Re: Reducing ‘grain’ in prints
2007-10-16 by Brian Ellis
There actually were two Moab Entrada Fine Art papers, Fine Art Natural and Fine Art Bright. The message below is apparently talking about the Bright. In any event, Moab was acquired by Legion Paper a year or so ago and the names of these two papers have been changed to Photo Rag Natural and Photo Rag Bright. A Moab rep told me that only the name has changed, the papers remain the same and the profiles on the Moab site are still good. I've only used the 190 and don't usually print on both sides but occasionally I use the second side as a proofing paper. The two sides have always seemed identical to me. --- Original Message -----
Show quoted textHide quoted text
From: "Howard Shaw" <glassman@...> To: <QuadtoneRIP@yahoogroups.com> Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2007 3:07 AM Subject: Re: [QuadtoneRIP] Re: Reducing \ufffdgrain\ufffd in prints > Mark > > I found the following message on a photo.net messageboard: > > http://photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=007NFt > > "What you are looking for is Moab Entrada Fine Art. The standard > version, in 190 or 300 grams. It is very bright white (whiter than > Hahnem\ufffdhle) and beatifully light textured. Both sides are coated, but > you can use only one side because it is nicely smooth and the other is > mostly somewhat defected by little air bubbles or grainy particles. The > paper is 100% cotton. Moab has some good profiles on their website for > using these papers with the 2200." > > This was from 2004 so maybe Moab have improved the paper but it may be > worth printing on the other side to see if the results are different. > > Otherwise you could try printing with the Epson driver using Dirk > Hobman's Photoshop curves. If that was okay then it would eliminate the > printer, paper and inks as the causes of the problem. > > http://www.inksupply.com/html/zip/hobman.zip > > regards > Howard > > Mark McCarvill wrote: >> Thanks for the feedback, Howard. >> >> I'm using double sided paper, and the nozzle checks are perfect. The >> only other paper I have is EEM, but it has a smoother surface than >> Entrada so, not surprisingly, EEM prints are less grainy. >> >> I started with a 100% black boost and worked my way down, because >> high levels just resulted in shiny black patches and scuffs. I also >> started with an overlap but eliminated it because once again blacks >> were too inky. >> >> I'm a little puzzled, because Entrada is a thick paper and can >> allegedly handle a LOT of ink. >> >> Mark >> >> --- In QuadtoneRIP@yahoogroups.com, Howard Shaw <glassman@...> wrote: >>> >>> I would check you're printing on the right side of the paper and that >>> you have good nozzle checks. Do you get this problem with other papers? >>> >>> The only slightly odd thing in your curve set up is that black boost is >>> less than your black ink limit. Normally it would be slightly more. You >>> could also introduce an overlap of say 8-12 to smooth the transitions. >>> >>> Howard >>> >>> Mark McCarvill wrote: >>> > I'm seeking suggestions on how to reduce `grain' in my QTR >>> > prints on Entrada natural. I'm using UT7 inks with eboni black on a >>> > 7600, printing at 1440 super. Here >> <http://www.stepwise.ca/QTR.jpg> is >>> > a test strip to illustrate the problem. >>> > >>> > For those interested in the detailed curve data, here >>> > <http://www.stepwise.ca/QTR_Curve.jpg> it is. >>> > >>> > In a nutshell, I'm using a very low ink limit (30%), which I know >>> > contributes to grain. But going higher (even 35%) results in >> shiny, inky >>> > lines in the 90 - 100% black patches. And printing at 2880 doesn't >>> > improve things. >>> > >>> > Any ideas would be welcome on how to introduce more smoothness without >>> > adding excessive ink. >>> > >>> > Thanks >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > Yahoo! Groups Links >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> Yahoo! Groups Links >> >> >> >> > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > >