Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Epson Sample Pack-mispacked  (Read 1178 times)
AaronPhotog
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 128


WWW
« on: November 20, 2010, 09:39:33 PM »
ReplyReply

I recently bought an Epson "Signature Worthy" paper sample pack for testing.  It contains 2 sheets each of various Epson papers, including Hot Press natural and bright, Cold Press natural and bright, Velvet Fine Art, Exhibition Fiber, and Ultra Premium Photo Paper Luster.  Previously, I had tested all but the Hot and Cold Press papers.  When finished printing the test sheets for those, I decided to see if there was any difference between my prior tests of Velvet Fine Art and the paper in the sample pack, because it would represent a newer batch.  The resulting test print was visually shockingly different from my previous test.  The blacks were weak compared to the earlier results.  What happened?  The sample pack papers were all packed with their stickers facing the same direction, with the obvious glossy papers having the stickers on the backs.  So, I hadn't checked whether this was also true of the matte papers that were hard to differentiate front from back.  In the case of those, however, the stickers were on the front side.

If you get a sample pack that has mixed paper types, and you have some that you can't tell front from back, do the finger lickin' test.  Lick the pads of your thumb and forefinger and pinch a corner of the paper.  The side that sticks the longest when you pull your thumb and forefinger away is the coated side.

After printing the ink test on the "back" side of the Velvet Fine Art, it now visually matched my previous results.  WHEW!  But now, I know not to trust Epson to label their own matte papers, and advise you not to assume that the papers are bad if you got one of those signature worthy sample packs and followed your best intuition.  Test for the coated side.

Aloha,
Logged

Aaron Dygart,
Honolulu
AaronPhotog
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 128


WWW
« Reply #1 on: November 21, 2010, 02:38:59 AM »
ReplyReply

Though it's not mentioned in Epson's own literature, but is somewhat vaguely mentioned in one seller's listing, it appears that the Hot Press and Cold Press papers are actually two-sided, as my front-and-back test prints seem to indicate.  That said, they still labeled the Velvet Fine Art the opposite of the glossy paper types.

Luminous Landscape has a review of the papers by Mark Dubovoy that's quite well written.  Though I need to order more paper to be able to complete my tests, my initial reaction is as follows:  The Hot Press papers are smooth, but the surface seems better to me than the overly deep (or high) texture of the Cold Press papers.  The blacks are good with both, but the Velvet Fine art holds the ink more evenly, with excellent detail, and reaches a slightly deeper black than the Hot and Cold Press papers. 

The addition of a buffer to the Hot and Cold Press papers may be a good idea or not.  The theory is that the buffer will slow down or prevent acidification.  Acidification can increase the likelihood of foxing.  High pH, though, can reduce the longevity of certain color dyes. 

I sent a silver print drymounted on mat board that was buffered with calcium carbonate to a very humid location on the big island.  First, the mat board became food for tiny mites, like the ones that eventually invade even sealed containers of rice.  The result was that the tiny insects thrived, and soon decided that the gelatin in the silver print was even more tasty.  They might not have invaded but for the enticing buffering agent.  I subsequently stopped using buffered mat board (not trying to start another topic, here).

Aloha,

Aaron
Logged

Aaron Dygart,
Honolulu
Ernst Dinkla
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2803


« Reply #2 on: November 21, 2010, 07:35:02 AM »
ReplyReply

Though it's not mentioned in Epson's own literature, but is somewhat vaguely mentioned in one seller's listing, it appears that the Hot Press and Cold Press papers are actually two-sided, as my front-and-back test prints seem to indicate.  That said, they still labeled the Velvet Fine Art the opposite of the glossy paper types.

Luminous Landscape has a review of the papers by Mark Dubovoy that's quite well written.  Though I need to order more paper to be able to complete my tests, my initial reaction is as follows:  The Hot Press papers are smooth, but the surface seems better to me than the overly deep (or high) texture of the Cold Press papers.  The blacks are good with both, but the Velvet Fine art holds the ink more evenly, with excellent detail, and reaches a slightly deeper black than the Hot and Cold Press papers. 


Aloha,

Aaron


Dual Sided but with the condition "sheets" in the info I have. The spectral plots of the samples I got are identical for front and back. The bright versions have an FBA content between HM PhotoRag Bright White and Moab's Entrada Rag Bright White which is a high load. The texture of the Epson Cold Press Bright (heaviest FBA content) is closer to a regular pattern (almost  like Canson's Mi-Teintes texture) than the Epson Cold Press Natural is.  Do not consider them as two varieties of the same paper, they are not.


met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst Dinkla

spectral plots of +100 inkjet papers:
http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
Logged
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad