Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: crane MSR - glossy?  (Read 3483 times)
sgwrx
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 158


« on: May 11, 2006, 10:21:54 PM »
ReplyReply

hi, is the crane MSR a glossy paper?  if it were to be compared with epson velvet fine art and epson premium luster, would it be more like the premium luster? it's not an actual glossy is it?
Logged
Tonsil
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 14


« Reply #1 on: May 11, 2006, 11:50:12 PM »
ReplyReply

Yep, it's a glossy paper. Coated and with a pronounced texture. It is designed for PK ink and when profiled correctly will yield beautiful prints. You must be ok with texture though and the prints should be displayed properly or the texture will be very noticable.
Logged
JeffKohn
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1671



WWW
« Reply #2 on: May 12, 2006, 01:20:07 AM »
ReplyReply

To me the paper itself doesn't seem to have much texture, and it's not as glossy as most "high-gloss" papers. To me what the Silver Rag surface most resembles is if you took a luster paper and ironed the little bumps so that they're almost flat.  It has the same type of "specular" glare as luster paper, unlike the more mirror-like reflections you get on a high-gloss paper.

It's definitely nicer than the traditional glossy/luster papers, and the DMAX is indeed impressive. I still think that for images not requiring the larger gamut/DMAX, the rag papers make for nicer looking prints IMHO.
Logged

sgwrx
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 158


« Reply #3 on: May 12, 2006, 01:39:58 PM »
ReplyReply

interesting thanks. i definitely want to try it!  i very much like the premium luster and the velvet fine art.

i'd like to get as "archival" as possible with the papers. at first that didn't seem a big deal to me, but yellowing and such makes me wonder.
Logged
Brian Gilkes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 431


WWW
« Reply #4 on: May 12, 2006, 06:19:07 PM »
ReplyReply

At the Crane factory they call the surface "Velina", although the marketing people label the product "Gloss". All a matter of definitions I guess, and you either like the surface or you don't. When you have it framed behind glass the discussion is irrelevant. FWIW I would not consider Silver Rag as gloss at all but a smooth, slightly crystalline lustre on an art  (rather than photo type ) base.
I find the unbrightened base tint very pleasant . It is slightly warm and does not compete with the image. It's dynamic range and gamut is similar to Epson Lustre , which is very good but not exceptional. I would be very interested in hearing from anyone who has obtained a DMax greater than 2.3. Although we can't pick it with a spectrophotometer , the colors have a clear luminosity that makes it stand out. I cannot emphasise enough the necessity for custom profiles to get the best out of this paper.
Cheers,
Brian,
www.pharoseditions.com.au
Logged
Stephen Best
Guest
« Reply #5 on: May 13, 2006, 02:47:14 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
At the Crane factory they call the surface "Velina", although the marketing people label the product "Gloss". All a matter of definitions I guess, and you either like the surface or you don't. When you have it framed behind glass the discussion is irrelevant. FWIW I would not consider Silver Rag as gloss at all but a smooth, slightly crystalline lustre on an art  (rather than photo type ) base.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=65271\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Brian,

Do you have a feel yet whether humectants with this paper are an issue or not?

I just reframed a number of large prints on resin-coated that were treated with Epson's recommended procedure and which milked up the glass considerably after just a couple of months. I can't see myself using resin-coated ever again.
Logged
Brian Gilkes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 431


WWW
« Reply #6 on: May 13, 2006, 04:58:22 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Stephen Best,May 13 2006, 07:47 AM
Brian,

Do you have a feel yet whether humectants with this paper are an issue or not?


It is too early for me to say with certitude, . The factory says not. I think most likely they are right as the paper dries quickly and has a resistance to smearing and scuffing . These are a couple of the best properties of art and phototype papers and together suggest humidicants are either escaping quickly or/and are being trapped by coatings or the paper itself.
Let's see what the situation is after a CMSR print , that has been allowed to air at say 20Deg. C and 50% relative humidity for a day, has been sealed behind glass for a year.
Cheers,
Brian
Pharos Editions
www.pharoseditions.com.au
Logged
jeffball
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 100


WWW
« Reply #7 on: May 13, 2006, 07:57:07 PM »
ReplyReply

Thanks so much for a very nice discussion on the CMSR.  I have been printing with this paper for two weeks.  I have found one area that leaves me wanting.  I printed some black and white where there are subtle gray transitions in sand dunes.  The mottled texture of the paper really starts to reveal itself in an unpleasant way in my opinion in these transition areas.  I am comparing prints right now with Moab NFA and Epson Premium Luster (EPL) with Phatte Black on 7800 and Imageprint 6.1.  The gray transitions areas are silky smooth with the EPL.  I do prefer the non-white base of the CMSR to the white of the EPL for these particular prints.  I will probably go with the CMSR just because I like the color of the print and my hope is that the outgassing will be less with this paper.  I also just printed a large order with some very large color prints on the CMSR and they are the best prints I have ever made.  I guess we are still looking for the "one" paper, but we sure have some great choices right now.  

This is the print I referenced above:

http://www.earthandskyphoto.com/line_in_the_sand.htm
Logged

Brian Gilkes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 431


WWW
« Reply #8 on: May 13, 2006, 11:57:13 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: jeffball,May 14 2006, 12:57 AM
I have found one area that leaves me wanting.  I printed some black and white where there are subtle gray transitions in sand dunes.  The mottled texture of the paper really starts to reveal itself in an unpleasant way in my opinion in these transition areas.  I am comparing prints right now with Moab NFA and Epson Premium Luster (EPL) with Phatte Black on 7800 and Imageprint 6.1.  The gray transitions areas are silky smooth with the EPL.

The use of Phatte means the LLK is not in the set and this may account for light gray problems. It may not appear on EPL as the profile may be quite different and it is possible you have a different media setting. I use Enhanced Matte  with a custom profile and all inks.
Brian
www.pharoseditions.com.au
Logged
jeffball
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 100


WWW
« Reply #9 on: May 14, 2006, 09:42:00 AM »
ReplyReply

That is a good point.  The transitions are fine on the Moab NFA as well as the test prints I made on the Epson Enhanced Matte.  I am probably mislabeling the flaw as it really is just an unveiling of the mottled texture.  The transitions in the gray are just fine on all of the prints.  I use Premium Luster as the media setting on both CMSR as well as EPL.  Perhaps a different setting for CMSR?  Glossy?
I will experiment with the media setting, but I do think it appears that the subtle mottled texture may be more readily visible in some printing scenarios.  Perhaps custom profiling would take care of this, but I am quite happy with IP and can find a workable solution.  Thanks for the information.  
Jeff
Quote
The use of Phatte means the LLK is not in the set and this may account for light gray problems. It may not appear on EPL as the profile may be quite different and it is possible you have a different media setting. I use Enhanced Matte  with a custom profile and all inks.
Brian
www.pharoseditions.com.au
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=65385\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged

Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad