Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Epson Exhibition Fiber  (Read 31176 times)
Peter Frahm
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 43


« on: December 25, 2007, 03:31:03 AM »
ReplyReply

I love this paper. I've tried all the first round and recent fiber based gloss offerings, and several of the Barytas. I've also seen some prints made on the Ilford Baryta (seems to be quite a bit of gloss differential there).

Hands down, hands up, whatever those things mean, this is the most useful and elegant paper I've seen yet. For black and white it just sings and for color it's equally good. When you print this stuff large, the surface looks great.

Not something I can say about some of the other papers from this family...Crane Silver Rag looked shaky when pushing it large, the texture just overwhelmed everything. The original, dimply, Innova fibre gloss just can't take a big print. The surface looks awful (much worse at large sizes) and the paper itself won't sit flat without an adhesive.

Great surface on EEF, smooth and subtle and truly elegant. Epson seems to have done their homework on this stuff and didn't trip on their feet to try to get this stuff out to quickly. Major kudos to those involved.

Minimal gloss diff (and I tend to challenge this artifact). It seems to naturally minimize the gloss diff issues and if I know it's going to be a huge factor on certain prints I comfortable knowing that a light hit of spray will solve the problem.

I actually like this paper with one coat of spray. If you take a close look at your old air dried gloss prints you will see that there actually is a fair amount of gloss. For me, the spray unifies everything. That said, I hate spraying.

You don't need to spray it. What pleases me is seeing how gracefully the ink lays down on this sheet.

I cannot see any bronzing going on with this paper.

Brighteners in the paper? I can live with it, wet papers had it.

Comparing prints I've made on EEF to my old graded Ilford Gallery wet prints yields a much more satisfying conclusion, in that, they rank. I'm talking about the original Ilford Gallery...they dumped a lot of silver out of that formula over time. The early stuff could produce incredible blacks. The EEF stacks up strongly across the tonal range in this regard.

What else...it sits perfectly flat. My experience with the Innova fiber gloss, and a few others, always involved considerable prayers to ward off head strikes, lots of them. The EEF just sits flat and stays flat after printing. The addition of ink to one side does not make it curl.

I've had a 16X20 hanging on my wall, taped on the two top corners, for a couple of months and it hasn't changed a bit..flat as the day it came out of the box. This is a big plus if you frame over mattes and don't want to dry/cold mount the print. Just museum tape in a hinged matte, works fine.

It's expensive. Yep, it is, but, I've been tossing money at these other papers for a while now and I'm willing to pay because this paper has everything I've been wanting since I started making inkjet prints. And, I can print color on it, it looks fantastic.

I'm sitting here beaming at a bw 16x20 under glass. I keep walking away from what I'm doing to go look at it.

Improvements? I think these companies will always be moving towards as smooth a surface as can be tolerated by the materials (through the entire print process), manufacturing processes, and their inherent limitations. The EEF is right there and if they try to make it smoother, more power to them. If not, I'm liking it the way it is. These are still a new set of challenges for all of these companies and, no doubt, things will continue to progress.

Happy Holidays
« Last Edit: February 11, 2008, 07:58:31 PM by Peter Frahm » Logged
kers
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 743


WWW
« Reply #1 on: December 25, 2007, 04:18:46 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I love this paper. I've tried all the first round and recent fiber based gloss offerings, and several of the Barytas. I've also seen some prints made on the Ilford Baryta (seems to be quite a bit of gloss differential there).
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=162986\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

On the Epson stand they showed this new paper on a 3800 and gloss differential was indeed minimal - almost pefect. only pure white areas were a bit standing out when looking under an angle.
I am using a HP Z3100 myself and I am happy to say that the paper also workes on this machine with the gloss enhancer on. But still some gloss differential in the colour prints- the black and white seems perfect.
  (The ilford paper does not work at all on the z3100 - the gloss enhancer soaks in the paper - lots of gloss differential there)
Also the gamut seems to be very large. It will be one of my first choice papers - too bad it does not come in rolls .

I also printed a lot of the real wet baryta papers and loved the material. (Agfa multigrade FB)
As for now the EEF is the only paper ( z3100) that gives me that same feeling.
« Last Edit: December 25, 2007, 04:53:12 AM by kers » Logged

Pieter Kers
www.beeld.nu
eleanorbrown
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 624


WWW
« Reply #2 on: December 25, 2007, 09:01:22 AM »
ReplyReply

I started a thread on this paper several weeks ago when I had a chance to do some test prints on a sample pack.  I concur with everything you've said---this paper is awesome.  I really like the texture---don't want it any smoother.  I think it's elegant.  Now we just need it in rolls and in a warm tone too.  The paper is near perfection.  the icing on the cake is that it's heavy and sits flat.   Eleanor


Quote
I love this paper. I've tried all the first round and recent fiber based gloss offerings, and several of the Barytas. I've also seen some prints made on the Ilford Baryta (seems to be quite a bit of gloss differential there).

Hands down, hands up, whatever those things mean, this is the most useful and elegant paper I've seen yet. For black and white it just sings and for color it's equally good. When you print this stuff large, the surface looks great.

Not something I can say about some of the other papers from this family...Crane Silver Rag looked shaky when pushing it large, the texture just overwhelmed everything. The original, dimply, Innova fibre gloss just can't take a big print. The surface looks awful (much worse at large sizes) and the paper itself won't sit flat without an adhesive.

Great surface on EEF, smooth and subtle and truly elegant. Epson seems to have done their homework on this stuff and didn't trip on their feet to try to get this stuff out to quickly. Major kudos to those involved.

Minimal gloss diff (and I tend to challenge this artifact). It seems to naturally minimize the gloss diff issues and if I know it's going to be a huge factor on certain prints I comfortable knowing that a light hit of spray will solve the problem.

I actually like this paper with one coat of spray. If you take a close look at your old air dried gloss prints you will see that there actually is a fair amount of gloss. For me, the spray unifies everything. That said, I hate spraying.

You don't need to spray it. What pleases me is seeing how gracefully the ink lays down on this sheet.

I cannot see any bronzing going on with this paper.

Nice choice of brightness, not overly brightened. Brighteners in the paper? I can live with it, wet papers had it.

Comparing prints I've made on EEF to my old graded Ilford Gallery wet prints yields a much more satisfying conclusion, in that, they rank. I'm talking about the original Ilford Gallery...they dumped a lot of silver out of that formula over time. The early stuff could produce incredible blacks. The EEF stacks up strongly across the tonal range in this regard.

What else...it sits perfectly flat. My experience with the Innova fiber gloss, and a few others, always involved considerable prayers to ward off head strikes, lots of them. The EEF just sits flat and stays flat after printing. The addition of ink to one side does not make it curl.

I've had a 16X20 hanging on my wall, taped on the two top corners, for a couple of months and it hasn't changed a bit..flat as the day it came out of the box. This is a big plus if you frame over mattes and don't want to dry/cold mount the print. Just museum tape in a hinged matte, works fine.

It's expensive. Yep, it is, but, I've been tossing money at these other papers for a while now and I'm willing to pay because this paper has everything I've been wanting since I started making inkjet prints. And, I can print color on it, it looks fantastic.

I'm sitting here beaming at a bw 16x20 under glass. I keep walking away from what I'm doing to go look at it.

Improvements? I think these companies will always be moving towards as smooth a surface as can be tolerated by the materials (through the entire print process), manufacturing processes, and their inherent limitations. The EEF is right there and if they try to make it smoother, more power to them. If not, I'm liking it the way it is. These are still a new set of challenges for all of these companies and, no doubt, things will continue to progress.

Happy Holidays
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=162986\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged

jecxz
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 377


WWW
« Reply #3 on: December 25, 2007, 01:51:14 PM »
ReplyReply

Are you using MK or PK ink? Thanks.
Logged

Peter Frahm
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 43


« Reply #4 on: December 25, 2007, 01:56:50 PM »
ReplyReply

Jecxg,

EEF is made for PK. You won't get near the dmax the paper is capable of using MK.
Logged
jecxz
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 377


WWW
« Reply #5 on: December 25, 2007, 02:32:31 PM »
ReplyReply

Thanks!
Logged

dealy663
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 57


« Reply #6 on: December 26, 2007, 02:03:51 PM »
ReplyReply

Is any one else seeing what look like micro cracks in the blacks of their images? I think it is from the texture of the paper. I've only made a handful of prints on this paper so far, but it is visible on all of them with significant black areas. Also it appears that these micro cracks aren't of the same density across the page, some areas have lots and lots, and others have very few to none.

Maybe I got a bad batch?

Derek
Logged

USA_Stewart
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 8


« Reply #7 on: December 26, 2007, 05:00:12 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I am using a HP Z3100 myself and I am happy to say that the paper also workes on this machine with the gloss enhancer on. But still some gloss differential in the colour prints- the black and white seems perfect.


What calibration settings are you using for the Epson Exhibition Fiber paper on the HP Z3100? I tried the "Fine Art Pearl (more ink)" setting and have encountered roller marks on the paper.

(12-28-07

Since my last post, I have experimented more with printing Epson Exhibition Fiber paper on the HPZ3100 printer. I have eliminated the roller marks I was getting during calibration. My final prints look beautiful on this paper.

Here's what I have done because EEF is not documented on the Z3100 printer:
(I am using Firmware 6008, HP Utility 3.1, and Driver 5.1)

In the HP Print Monitor choose "manage papers."
Click on the plus sign. This brings up the "Add custom paper" dialogue box.
Type in "Epson Exhibition Fiber". Then click on "Paper Type."
Select "Fine Art Material" and under that select "Fine Art Pearl (more ink)".
Then click on "Change Printing Properties" and under Dry Time select "Extended".
Note that when I calibrated the paper with these settings I did get some roller marks on the calibration sheet. However, I then profiled the paper with "Gloss Enhancer" off. I printed out of Lightroom and selected "Best Quality", "GE OFF", "More Passes", and "Application managed color."
The resulting prints are excellent with NO roller marks. There seems to be no need for the gloss enhancer with this paper. The paper looks very much like an air dried fiber based print. Some may think it has a little more shine than they are use to, but when I was fiber printing, I learned from photographer Ruth Bernhard that you could steam fiber based prints to bring out more shine if they dried too dull. She said she steamed many of her prints. These EEF prints look to me like fiber based, air dried prints that have been steamed. They are quite beautiful.

If you have done something different and had good results, please let me know.

-Stewart
« Last Edit: December 30, 2007, 11:21:36 PM by USA_Stewart » Logged
tomrock
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 240


WWW
« Reply #8 on: December 26, 2007, 05:14:45 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Is any one else seeing what look like micro cracks in the blacks of their images?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=163227\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I'm not seeing anything like this on prints made on my 3800 but I've only done color prints so far. I've looked pretty closely (held the prints up to my nose but I haven't used a magnifying glass or anything).

What printer are you using? And are you seeing these cracks on color or B&W prints?
Logged
dealy663
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 57


« Reply #9 on: December 26, 2007, 09:04:49 PM »
ReplyReply

I'm printing on an Epson 3800. I've tried both B/W and color and see the micro cracks in the blacks of both.

Maybe I have a bad batch.

I'd love to hear if anyone else is having this problem.

Quote
I'm not seeing anything like this on prints made on my 3800 but I've only done color prints so far. I've looked pretty closely (held the prints up to my nose but I haven't used a magnifying glass or anything).

What printer are you using? And are you seeing these cracks on color or B&W prints?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=163260\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged

Farmer
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1630


WWW
« Reply #10 on: December 26, 2007, 09:21:26 PM »
ReplyReply

What driver settings are you using?
Logged

nemophoto
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 495



WWW
« Reply #11 on: December 26, 2007, 09:40:33 PM »
ReplyReply

Out of curiosity, has anyone used this paper on a 4000? I'd love to try it, but I have so much other "gloss-dried-matte" type paper, the last thing I want or need is yet another paper type in my cabinet.
Logged

dealy663
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 57


« Reply #12 on: December 26, 2007, 09:41:22 PM »
ReplyReply

Premium glossy, ABW mode Dark

Quote
What driver settings are you using?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=163296\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged

NashvilleMike
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 177


« Reply #13 on: December 26, 2007, 09:48:37 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Is any one else seeing what look like micro cracks in the blacks of their images? I think it is from the texture of the paper. [a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=163227\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I just checked a 16x20 B&W I ran the other day on EEF and no problems with the blacks.

Might it be setting related?

FWIW, I'm using the following settings on my Epson 3800

Paper Type: Premium Glossy
2880 mode, no smoothing, no fast speed.
I'm using the pixel genius supplied profile in relative colorimetric mode (most of the time)

In the adjustments, I'm using +3% ink density, platen gap of "Wide" and paper thickness setting of "5".

Maybe try those and see how it goes? (you can skip the additional ink density - that's just a personal preference of mine)

-m
Logged
dealy663
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 57


« Reply #14 on: December 26, 2007, 11:17:27 PM »
ReplyReply

I've tried everything you did except boosting the ink density, and my platen gap was 4.

Printing in ABW mode you don't use a profile, not that a profile could make this type of difference anyway.

I'll try fooling with the ink density, and uping the platen gap.

Why did you feel the need to boost the ink density? I'm already getting really excellent deep blacks on this paper with the default ink density.

...

Well I just ran off a new print of the same image, and those settings made no difference in the "micro cracks", and for whatever reason made the Pizza wheel marks even worse (maybe greater ink density puts out more ink and it hasn't had enough drying time before the pizza wheels?).
Logged

Paul Sumi
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1217


« Reply #15 on: December 26, 2007, 11:34:16 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Is any one else seeing what look like micro cracks in the blacks of their images?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=163227\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I'm just starting to test this paper and have not seen anything like you describe on either B&W or color prints.   This is on an Epson R2400 and admittedly on 8.5" x 11" paper.

Paul
Logged

Peter Frahm
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 43


« Reply #16 on: December 27, 2007, 12:05:53 AM »
ReplyReply

Haven't had any issues with micro cracking, except when I eat a lot of red meat  : (

I've been printing on a 7800 with Imageprint and sometimes using the Epson drivers and their canned profiles.

I just checked a few prints with fairly large, dense black areas and haven't found any micro cracks. God forbid we need more terminology for a new, undesirable artifact on gloss stock.

I'm not familiar with micro cracking but I spose if it was there I would know it. The blacks look great.


NemoPhoto,

I would imagine you would get great results on the 4000. You are missing "light light black" on that printer so you might experience a more noticable gloss differential than with the K3 set..bronzing, im not too sure about that, as said, I see zero bronzing on the prints I've made.

In any case, you can always spray a bit to get rid of it (i know you hate that too). As said in my original post, I have been experiencing almost no need to spray using the 7800 and K3.

Like you Nemo, I've got a quite a bit of gloss fiber from other manufacturers around here, and in all honesty, this Epson EFP is way ahead of the pack. Over the last few years of chasing this stuff, I've learned to admit to myself when I've wasted my money. It's hard to come to terms with dropping big money on stuff and being disappointed, sometimes we lie to ourselves. I'll speak for myself, it took me a while to admit that the prints I made on some of the early "gloss fiber" papers were, in fact, not "the shit" that I thought they were, they were just plain old shit, headed for the trash can because of the same old artifacts and downright maddening textures (IMO). the only one close was the Innova Ultra Smooth (some have said that Epson used this paper as a model for EFP)..not a bad paper but it curls so much and I think the ink lays down much more elegantly on the EFP (my experience and observation). I also exeperienced horrible quality control with many of these other papers, sending many a roll and box back.

That reminds me...I  never had any acceptable luck in de-curllng these gloss fibers in roll form. The ones I tried in roll form were just way to delicate to even screw around with that much handling and stress.  I took them out of my de-curler, examine and find problems ranging from blemishes, scratching, buckles where the emulsion didn't quite cooperate and uneven de-curling. The papers with more texture..Crane, Hanne fine art  Pearl, could camoflauge these problems better than the smooth surfaces. I think Epson is being smart about the limitations in this material. recognizing what it can do and what it can't. Plus, whatever they've done to make it so flat would just be wasted on that notion.

I do wish Epson would make a long cut sheet in a 17" or 24" height for printing long horizontal images..panos, etc. I would buy that. It's the only thing on my wish list right now. I suppose the Innova Ultra smooth in roll form will suffice but I do get stressed when de-curling this stuff.

If Epson would get on board with a tricked out, subtle GLOP scheme, one that causes inkless areas to disappear, seamlessly into the sheen of these papers, I'd gladly wear bright green satin short shorts for an entire summer. I'm pretty much ready to do it right now. Sorry to ramble.
« Last Edit: December 27, 2007, 12:15:36 AM by Peter Frahm » Logged
dealy663
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 57


« Reply #17 on: December 27, 2007, 12:39:08 AM »
ReplyReply

I've always been pretty quick to disregard these air dried fiber glossy emulators. I've not yet bought a second package of any of them, and I've tried just about all of them except for the new Ilford Silk baryta.

All of these papers have real drawbacks in one form or another. I really had my hopes up for the EEF. However with the problem I'm having and serious pizza wheel marks those hopes are fading fast also.

In all honesty I just don't believe that any of these papers is producing a truly superior image to Epson Premium Luster. Some have different colored paper, all feel much better in the hand, but are they really better? Most have pretty close to awful surface textures, several are incredibly fragile, all are quite expensive, all have the blasted surface reflections and GD issues, and non have real longevity data published. As a result I still turn to matte papers like VFA and H German Etching first, and only if I can't get my image to work out on the rag papers do I move over and consider glossy.

This paper chase makes me feel like Don Quixote tilting at windmills.

Quote
Like you Nemo, I've got a quite a bit of gloss fiber from other manufacturers around here, and in all honesty, this Epson EFP is way ahead of the pack. Over the last few years of chasing this stuff, I've learned to admit to myself when I've wasted my money. It's hard to come to terms with dropping big money on stuff and being disappointed, sometimes we lie to ourselves. I'll speak for myself, it took me a while to admit that the prints I made on some of the early "gloss fiber" papers were, in fact, not "the shit" that I thought they were, they were just plain old shit, headed for the trash can because of the same old artifacts and downright maddening textures (IMO).
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=163318\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged

Peter Frahm
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 43


« Reply #18 on: December 27, 2007, 01:02:23 AM »
ReplyReply

I agree one hundred percent, Dealy, except for the part about this sheet not producing an image better than Premium Luster. I think you might agree once you get past your issues. One of these horses is still in the barn. I'm looking at an older premium luster print next to a EFP print, same image, as we speak. The EFP is in a different league. Something sounds strange about your cracking issue.

You're on a 3800?

Are your pizza wheel marks coming from your feed rollers?

I'm using a paper thickness setting of 6 in a custom paper setup on my 7800.

Are you printing with a lot of ink, 2880? Maybe jump down to a 1440 if you are

Run through everything and perhaps try setting everything loose and wide and work from there.

I noticed you're using a premium glossy setting..try something else.

I believe most folks are setting for luster. Obviously, there is no choice for EFP in the current driver versions.

Are you sure your 3800 is set for PK? Just some thoughts.

As you can tell from my babbling, I've experienced the exact same Don Quixote feelings you have had regarding all these papers.

Perhaps you do have a bad box. I've seen many 3800 users getting happy with this paper.

Stick with it and you may find some joy.
« Last Edit: December 27, 2007, 01:12:20 AM by Peter Frahm » Logged
teague_l
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7


« Reply #19 on: December 27, 2007, 08:55:19 AM »
ReplyReply

Epson recommends the Premium Glossy setting in the enclosed documentation. I've been very happy with the prints on EEF made at that setting. I've got great color, deep blacks, and no "micro-cracking" or other obvious flaws.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad