Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Canson Infinity Platine Fibre Rag  (Read 13964 times)
JohnBrew
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 750


WWW
« on: June 10, 2011, 02:07:01 PM »
ReplyReply

It's a fine recommendation from Mark on this paper. However, I went to the Canson site to check on the technical aspects. At the bottom of the page there is a pdf download to click on. The pdf contains the identical info as the website page which is no help whatsoever. I really would like to see technical data on this paper much in the same manner that Hahnemuhle supplies with their papers.
I do agree with Mark about the optical brighteners which is why I've dropped Hahnemuhle Photo Rag Baryta (Hahnemuhle is quite vague on the amount admitting it has some OBA's) in favor of Photo Rag Pearl. But the Canson is certainly on my list to try next time I place an order for paper.
« Last Edit: June 10, 2011, 02:47:40 PM by JohnBrew » Logged

Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6945


WWW
« Reply #1 on: June 10, 2011, 02:54:04 PM »
ReplyReply

Just to be clear, I don't think you are talking about this "Mark", because I don't recall recommending this paper. I have recommended Canson Baryta Photographique and Ilford Gold Fibre Silk because they are virtually the same thing and I use them.
Logged

Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....." http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/scanning_workflows_with_silverfast_8.shtml
Ernst Dinkla
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2854


« Reply #2 on: June 10, 2011, 03:05:39 PM »
ReplyReply

It's a fine recommendation from Mark on this paper. However, I went to the Canson site to check on the technical aspects. At the bottom of the page there is a pdf download to click on. The pdf contains the identical info as the website page which is no help whatsoever. I really would like to see technical data on this paper much in the same manner that Hahnemuhle supplies with their papers.
I do agree with Mark about the optical brighteners which is why I've dropped Hahnemuhle Photo Rag Baryta (Hahnemuhle is quite vague on the amount admitting it has some OBA's) in favor of Photo Rag Pearl. But the Canson is certainly on my list to try next time I place an order for paper.

In my book (SpectrumViz) the 3 are all in the same class = little or no FBAs.


met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst

New: Spectral plots of +250 inkjet papers:

http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
Logged
Light Seeker
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 255


« Reply #3 on: June 10, 2011, 03:35:50 PM »
ReplyReply

Platine is different than Baryta Photographique. It's doesn't have a baryta coating, it's OBA free and it's a cotton rag paper (vs. alpha-cellulose).

I just brought a roll in to start working with. I can check the container to see if the information it comes with is any different than the web site (likely not). Beyond that, I could measure the paper base with my spectro if that would be helpful.

Terry.
Logged
JeffKohn
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1671



WWW
« Reply #4 on: June 10, 2011, 04:47:30 PM »
ReplyReply

I do agree with Mark about the optical brighteners which is why I've dropped Hahnemuhle Photo Rag Baryta (Hahnemuhle is quite vague on the amount admitting it has some OBA's) in favor of Photo Rag Pearl.
What do you mean vague? The PDF data sheet for Photo Rag Baryta says "none" under OBA Content, I'm not sure how they could be more clear than that...

Quote
But the Canson is certainly on my list to try next time I place an order for paper.
I've given Platin Fibre Rag a look. It's very similar in look, feel to Photo Rag Baryta, despite not actually being a baryta paper. Hold a sheet of each in your hand, and you'd be hard-pressed to tell the difference, aside from the HPRB being just a tiny bit warmer. The only real substantial difference I've found, and the reason I still prefer Photo Rag Baryta despite the higher price, is that the dmax and gamut of Platine Fiber Rag are not quite as good with Lucia EX inks. It probably wouldn't be an issue for monochrome, but for color images with deep/saturated colors the difference is enough for me to prefer the Hahnemuhle paper.

Assuming you're not after the cool-white look, I've yet to find a paper that is as good of an all-around performer has HPRB.
Logged

AveryRagan
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 34


« Reply #5 on: June 10, 2011, 04:48:55 PM »
ReplyReply

I have been using this paper since it came out and it does not contain any optical brighteners according to Canson. It's a pleasure to work with whether in sheet or roll. I am lucky to have a Charles Cramer print on this paper so that I can see, under my conditions,  exactly what it will do in the hands of a master. It is definitely worth giving it a trial, it might even surprise some on how well it handles saturation.

I had wondered how long it would take Michael to get to this paper after his review of Canson Infinity Baryta Photographique.
Logged
Light Seeker
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 255


« Reply #6 on: June 10, 2011, 05:16:56 PM »
ReplyReply

The only real substantial difference I've found, and the reason I still prefer Photo Rag Baryta despite the higher price, is that the dmax and gamut of Platine Fiber Rag are not quite as good with Lucia EX inks. It probably wouldn't be an issue for monochrome, but for color images with deep/saturated colors the difference is enough for me to prefer the Hahnemuhle paper.

Jeff, which Canon driver setting(s) did you use with Platine on your Canon?

Terry.
Logged
JeffKohn
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1671



WWW
« Reply #7 on: June 10, 2011, 06:49:24 PM »
ReplyReply

Jeff, which Canon driver setting(s) did you use with Platine on your Canon?
I tried several base media types and could never get a maximum black better than about L* = 4.3 or so. In the end I created a custom media type based on Photo Paper Plus SG which seemed to give the best overall results.

I'm not saying the gamut/DMax is bad by any means; it's probably perfectly fine for a lot of images. HPRB is just a little better, and for some images it shows.
Logged

Light Seeker
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 255


« Reply #8 on: June 10, 2011, 07:17:13 PM »
ReplyReply

Thanks Jeff.

Terry.
Logged
narikin
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 859


« Reply #9 on: June 10, 2011, 09:26:06 PM »
ReplyReply

I have used all the papers mentioned above.  I ignore the 'feel' of them, as my work is framed, and thats that - its a distraction.
Surface DOES matter however, and for me this is Platine's weakness. It has too much stipple, and I certainly would not call it air dried gloss.

Frame a Platine print and put it in a gallery, catch the light and you will see fine micro-stipple texture all over your photo. for me thats a deal breaker.  And sadly Canson Baryta is only a little better.  I end up back with Harman FBAL due to that having a truly smooth surface, and great longevity.

I go to a lot of care and expense to have ultra sharp images and I do not want to throw that away on a paper that looks ok dead on, but stipples at any other angle.
Logged
neil snape
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1432


WWW
« Reply #10 on: June 11, 2011, 03:31:35 AM »
ReplyReply

Recently I went back and watched the entire video interview with Henry Wilhelm and Michael R, . In the end you must really listen to the insistance of traditional BW prints on alpha cellulose. As well the use of OBA is a user choice as there is still not enough information about it's decay over time with or without light, how composite inkjet inks will affect OBA etc. Henry also said the discussions on this will go on with vigor.

Some manufacturers use OBA to control the white point of the appearance in a certain lighting condition more than try to add value* to the image by making a bright white paper it wasn't intended to be. OF course the papers that are labelled bright white are intended to be such>

Depending on the destination of the prints , using papers with limited OBA or alpha cellulose might not be such a bad thing after all.
Logged
Alan Goldhammer
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1663


WWW
« Reply #11 on: June 11, 2011, 07:23:18 AM »
ReplyReply

Recently I went back and watched the entire video interview with Henry Wilhelm and Michael R, . In the end you must really listen to the insistance of traditional BW prints on alpha cellulose. As well the use of OBA is a user choice as there is still not enough information about it's decay over time with or without light, how composite inkjet inks will affect OBA etc. Henry also said the discussions on this will go on with vigor.

Some manufacturers use OBA to control the white point of the appearance in a certain lighting condition more than try to add value* to the image by making a bright white paper it wasn't intended to be. OF course the papers that are labelled bright white are intended to be such>

Depending on the destination of the prints , using papers with limited OBA or alpha cellulose might not be such a bad thing after all.
Neil, what is the source of the interview that you note?  I would be interested in seeing it.  With respect to rag versus alpha-cellulose as a paper stock there really is not difference at all from a chemical perspective.  The major constituent of paper is alpha-cellulose and the reason rag is held up as the "gold" standard is probably more an accident of paper making history than anything else (though one could make the argument for papyrus though we don't seem to have any inkjet papers made from this source  Wink).  Alpha-cellulose from traditional wood sources is cheaper than cotton rag but has higher lignin concentrations and processing is required to get rid of the lignin which can cause permanency problems down the line.  Thus, I don't believe that we should automatically discard alpha-cellulose papers.

I think there is a significant body of data at this point in time regarding OBAs (the Aardenburg site has much more publicly available data than does Wilhelm) and clearly that research shows some problems with certain popular papers.  Studies on decay of OBAs in the absence of light are meaningless from my perspective since ultimately we want our prints to be viewed (though maybe for certain folios where the prints would only be exposed to light for short times it might be useful to have such data).

Alan
Logged

JohnBrew
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 750


WWW
« Reply #12 on: June 11, 2011, 07:46:43 AM »
ReplyReply

What do you mean vague? The PDF data sheet for Photo Rag Baryta says "none" under OBA Content, I'm not sure how they could be more clear than that...
Sorry, Jeff. I seem to have confused H Baryta FB (the new one) with PRB. Strange that the new one would have OBA's. Anyway, I still have a lot of HPRB on hand so I won't be getting rid of it anytime soon. I just printed ten prints for an exhibition in Italy, used the H PR Pearl and was quite satisfied with the results. I like the Pearl for color the Baryta for BW & toned prints.
Logged

neil snape
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1432


WWW
« Reply #13 on: June 11, 2011, 08:37:06 AM »
ReplyReply

Alan, it was in 2009 I think , and is a video interview on LL. The type of interview that means a lot to most, and those on the trails of these topics a lot more.

Agreed Mark is taking this much further. Yet it has to be done in na way that doesn't step on toes, as Mark knows all too well.

Dark storage is an important part of permanence testing, but of course you're right if the purpose of display permanence is to be exposed to light , dark storage and possible auto-catalytic decay would/should be a moot issue. That is until it is put back in storage, LOL.

I read the entire book by Henry. While I thought why would I read about film no longer sold, it actually said something . That something is research sometimes finds the unexpected. That is where the real devil may be in OBA.

BTW I only followed the video , and remembered what Henry said about alpha cellulose being different than wood pulp in being that  lignin are removed chemically. Whereas coton fibre ( is it a hemp plant?) has none to begin with.
Logged
abiggs
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 555



WWW
« Reply #14 on: June 11, 2011, 09:31:14 AM »
ReplyReply

Just to be clear, I don't think you are talking about this "Mark", because I don't recall recommending this paper. I have recommended Canson Baryta Photographique and Ilford Gold Fibre Silk because they are virtually the same thing and I use them.

The Mark that is referenced is co-owner of Luminous Landscape, Mark Dubovoy.
Logged

Andy Biggs
http://www.andybiggs.com
Africa Photo Safaris | Workshops | Fine Art Prints
Ernst Dinkla
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2854


« Reply #15 on: June 11, 2011, 09:37:30 AM »
ReplyReply

Cotton plant delivers cotton. 90 to 95% cellulose
Flax delivers linen (after retting).
Hemp plant delivers hemp as used in ship rope.
Jute plant delivers jute for sacks etc.
Wood you know, there are different processes to extract the cellulose though. 40% cellulose
The amount of cellulose in the raw material is decreasing from top to bottom of this list.
There are more fiber plants that can deliver cellulose for example Kenaf and several grasses. Algea can be used to make cellulose.

There are some Japanese inkjet papers based on Kenaf.


met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst

New: Spectral plots of +250 inkjet papers:

http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
Logged
Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6945


WWW
« Reply #16 on: June 11, 2011, 09:42:50 AM »
ReplyReply

The Mark that is referenced is co-owner of Luminous Landscape, Mark Dubovoy.

OK - a number of "Marks" around!
Logged

Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....." http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/scanning_workflows_with_silverfast_8.shtml
abiggs
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 555



WWW
« Reply #17 on: June 11, 2011, 09:43:44 AM »
ReplyReply

agreed, there are more Marks than Mark Segal!
Logged

Andy Biggs
http://www.andybiggs.com
Africa Photo Safaris | Workshops | Fine Art Prints
Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6945


WWW
« Reply #18 on: June 11, 2011, 09:45:04 AM »
ReplyReply

Of course.

Cheers,

Mark (S) :-)
Logged

Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....." http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/scanning_workflows_with_silverfast_8.shtml
Alan Goldhammer
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1663


WWW
« Reply #19 on: June 11, 2011, 01:53:07 PM »
ReplyReply

Cotton plant delivers cotton. 90 to 95% cellulose
Flax delivers linen (after retting).
Hemp plant delivers hemp as used in ship rope.
Jute plant delivers jute for sacks etc.
Wood you know, there are different processes to extract the cellulose though. 40% cellulose
The amount of cellulose in the raw material is decreasing from top to bottom of this list.
There are more fiber plants that can deliver cellulose for example Kenaf and several grasses. Algea can be used to make cellulose.

There are some Japanese inkjet papers based on Kenaf.


met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst

Paper can be made from any of the sources that Ernst mentions above and additionally bamboo and sugar cane (which are used by Hahnemuhle to make commercial inkjet papers; I've used the bamboo paper quite effectively when a warm matte paper is desired).  All plant products contain lignin at various levels with cotton having the least.  Cotton can also be mechanically processed quite easily to produce extremely high quality paper while other alpha-cellulose based materials need stronger processing.  A paper with a good table of lignin quantities is here.
Logged

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad