Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Canson Infinity Platine Fibre Rag  (Read 12896 times)
Clearair
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 131


« Reply #40 on: June 13, 2011, 04:13:49 AM »
ReplyReply

I have all my prints hanging for me to judge for exhibition in my home, unglazed.
Mounted onto a Diabond style substrate.
Four different brands and Lustre to matt papers printed by me. Some have OBA, not something I like but try avoiding it.

It is a large high ceiling space in Dorset half a mile from the sea.
Oldest prints mounted this way, about 20 months or so.
The prints are perfect, just like the day I mounted them. The prints with OBA's printed and only hanging for six months so far.

I intend to exhibit them like this as I prefer the look and so do most of my visitors so far.
Transport is an issue as they are prone to damage, so may box frame them to protect the edges.

Foam and framed prints and canvas stretch mounted prints in the same environment had some failures with warping.

I don't spray or coat anything or avoid direct lighting. Well, there is not much of that in the UK anyway.

I know this is not a long time for judging longevity but it is an alternative to bulky, costly framing with an optically clear glass, the only alternative for me as all other glass I have tried very obviously showed colour shifts when looking at the art work. Just to expensive and laminates hot or cold available here are not archival so why bother.

If I bought a sculpture I would not want to knock it over, so why would I spill handle or whatever a hanging picture?
It also nice for people to see the paper if you have been selective in the printing process.........................!

Regards
Logged
djoy
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 50


« Reply #41 on: June 13, 2011, 08:17:01 AM »
ReplyReply

I'd like to know definitively whether this paper is intended for Photo Black, or Matte Black ink.... to some extent I don't suppose it matters and you could use either, but the recent review by Mark Dubovoy suggests this paper is intended for Photo Black ink. However, Michael also mentioned this paper way back in January 2010 as a side note in his evaluation on Infinity Baryta Photographique, only Michael believed that the Platine Fiber Rag was intended for Matte Black inks.

Looking at the technical information on Canson's site, I'm none the wiser.  Undecided
Logged
KeithR
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 629


« Reply #42 on: June 13, 2011, 08:26:42 AM »
ReplyReply

I'd like to know definitively whether this paper is intended for Photo Black, or Matte Black ink.... to some extent I don't suppose it matters and you could use either, but the recent review by Mark Dubovoy suggests this paper is intended for Photo Black ink. However, Michael also mentioned this paper way back in January 2010 as a side note in his evaluation on Infinity Baryta Photographique, only Michael believed that the Platine Fiber Rag was intended for Matte Black inks.

Looking at the technical information on Canson's site, I'm none the wiser.  Undecided

Concerning the Canson Platine Fiber Rag, I posted about this back in February:
"And therein lies the rub. We have forever been told that descriptions that state things like "100% cotton" and "Fibre Rag" are terms synonymous with Matte Black ink. And terms like "Photo" and "Glossy" use Photo Black. Why can't the people that market this stuff, LABEL it as to which ink is recommended for the type of paper that it is. A simple "For best results it is recommended that Photo Black(or Matte Black) ink be used for this paper". I had been looking at samples of the Canson line at a local dealer(the ONLY dealer locally that actually has a WIDE variety to look at and compare side by side) but the 100% cotton and Rag convinced me that I could not use it since I use PK. Unfortunately, the only person that I could ask at the time was someone(not his area of expertise) that didn't know if the Platine FR was PK or MK compatible.
Thank you Kirk for your answer! Next time I'm by that store(no one else in town carries it) I'll take another close look at the Canson line:"

I did get to go back to that store and looked at the samples and bought a package to try. As it says on the Canson website it is for use with Photo Black, which is what I use. It does say "Glossy" on the package, which indicates PK ink, but I find the surface to be softer, almost like a semi-matte, which is what I prefer.
Logged

The destination is our goal but itís the journey that educates us.
Randy Carone
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 539


« Reply #43 on: June 13, 2011, 08:29:30 AM »
ReplyReply

Canson advises Premium Luster as the paper type, so Photo Black ink is the appropriate ink for their Platine Fibre Rag.

@KeithR - Museo's Silver Rag and Hahnemuhle's Photo Rag Baryta are two examples of 100% cotton paper that use Photo Black on their 'gloss' printing surface. Cotton does not indicate that Matte Black is the correct choice.
« Last Edit: June 13, 2011, 08:34:24 AM by Randy Carone » Logged

Randy Carone
Alan Goldhammer
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1605


WWW
« Reply #44 on: June 13, 2011, 09:24:21 AM »
ReplyReply

@KeithR - Museo's Silver Rag and Hahnemuhle's Photo Rag Baryta are two examples of 100% cotton paper that use Photo Black on their 'gloss' printing surface. Cotton does not indicate that Matte Black is the correct choice.
Randy is correct; it is the surface coating and not the paper stock that determines which black ink to use.  When in doubt prior to purchase always check the manufacturer's website.  I have always found that they provide the correct information.
Logged

narikin
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 854


« Reply #45 on: June 14, 2011, 07:11:34 AM »
ReplyReply

As for how one looks at the prints - indeed - generally straight-on; but I thought it would be fun putting this to the test. I have my Toronto panorama (done with a Phase One P40+) hanging on a wall (no glass) - that copy printed on Canson Baryta Photographique in an Epson 7900. I wanted to see first of all at how much of angle I could view it while still seeing the image properly, and next, whether the paper finish interferes with the apparent acuity of image detail.

Hmmm, who really looks at a print except from dead on? I might walk up to a print from an angle, but I really only look at a print dead on. And frankly the Canson Plantine is superb-my favorite paper for glossy inks.

ok - for the sake of a good humored disagreement: take Mark's panorama, you stand in front of a part of it and that looks ok dead-on, turn your head slightly to the left or right (it is a panorama, after all) and you are going to be hit by surface stipple.

A line of prints on a gallery wall, as you walk along you don't have blinkers on that only allow you to see one at a time, you view the one in front of you, and the others lining out from there. Sometimes they are not in a neat line - higher/lower, or there may be a window that catches them at a rake.  In all those cases you are hit primarily by the texture, the surface stipple, before you get to see the image itself dead on, and: "First Impressions", etc.  In such cases the stipple of (e.g.) Platine interferes with the image.

My point is this: why have it there at all?  Who said, ok, lets take this amazing high tech coating with a perfect smooth surface carefully laid on our top range all cotton paper... and... put a texture on it?  Why?  I just don't understand why Canson (or Hahnemuhle with PRB) add stipple texture to their surface.   Huh

« Last Edit: June 14, 2011, 07:17:10 AM by narikin » Logged
narikin
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 854


« Reply #46 on: June 14, 2011, 07:14:09 AM »
ReplyReply

If I were to make the effort of getting some work accepted for an exhibit I think I would select the no glass- no glaze option. People who go to galleries and the gallery owners themselves are usually well-behaved in how they handle or don't handle the art, so the risk of damage is probably quite low, while the native image quality impact would be quite high.

I did this at the Venice Biennale a few years back.   Everything came back ruined.  Every. Single. Print.
It isn't worth the risk, except maybe in your own home.  It took 3 years and an Italian lawyer to get back a modest % of the insurance value.


Logged
Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6819


WWW
« Reply #47 on: June 14, 2011, 07:43:16 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi Narikin: OK, understood. On the matter of the texturized coatings - I think the point of it is very simple - a compromise trying to get the high DMax without the distraction of the gloss reflections. This has been around for many decades. I remember using Velvet Stipple paper when I was a kid in my darkroom back in the 1950s. So the basic idea has a sustained market for a reason - many people like it. Others including you find it distracting so they don't. That's fine, but only to make the point that there is a reason for it. Now, my pano is a bit of an outlier as a general case in hand, but I mentioned it simply to emphasize that at least - I - (and by implication I'm assuming many others), can still resolve the fine detail of the images in our brains while looking at mildly textured papers from a range of angles; but usually to appreciate the "art" we do tend to view it straight-on, and in that condition the texture is much less of an issue.

On the question of protection, when I made that comment, it was in the context of locally produced work going to and from a local gallery under my supervision. When you are shipping stuff and have no control over the handling, that is a completely different ball-game and in that circumstance I expect surface coating plus a lot else is well-advised. Collecting from insurance companies is a "legendary process" world-wide I think.
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: 2805


« Reply #48 on: June 14, 2011, 08:29:46 AM »
ReplyReply


Now, my pano is a bit of an outlier as a general case in hand, but I mentioned it simply to emphasize that at least - I - (and by implication I'm assuming many others), can still resolve the fine detail of the images in our brains while looking at mildly textured papers from a range of angles; but usually to appreciate the "art" we do tend to view it straight-on, and in that condition the texture is much less of an issue.


Mark,

Both gloss difference and bronzing are surface issues we hardly can detect while viewing prints straight-on, yet it is seen as a quality defect. In practice viewing straight on is not that simple :-)

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: 6819


WWW
« Reply #49 on: June 14, 2011, 08:56:08 AM »
ReplyReply

Mark,

Both gloss difference and bronzing are surface issues we hardly can detect while viewing prints straight-on, yet it is seen as a quality defect. In practice viewing straight on is not that simple :-)

met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst

New: Spectral plots of +250 inkjet papers:

http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm

Ernst, with all due respect, perhaps there is a misunderstanding, but this isn't what I'm talking about. The issue raised in this thread that I'm addressing is whether the presence of the surface texture on the paper interferes with the viewers' appreciation of image detail. I believe this is not comparable to bronzing and gloss differential. And maybe I'm missing something, but when I look at a print straight-on, it seems like a pretty straightforward process to me. I position my eyes perpendicular to the print surface from a normal viewing distance, which is the normal way prints are meant to be looked at, and I see what I see.
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
John R Smith
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1357


Still crazy, after all these years


« Reply #50 on: June 14, 2011, 12:07:25 PM »
ReplyReply

Personally, I don't like any surface texture on a print, or at least as little as possible. It's not like a pencil or charcoal drawing on cartridge paper, where the texture becomes part of the artist's intent. I don't want to see a texture, or reflections, or bronzing or gloss diff - I want to see the picture.

In that respect, Harman's original Matt FB mp baryta paper was ace - matt and dead smooth. But obviously nobody else thought so, because they have discontinued it. And it was terribly delicate.

John
Logged

Hasselblad 500 C/M, SWC and CFV-39 DB
and a case full of (very old) lenses and other bits
KeithR
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 629


« Reply #51 on: June 14, 2011, 07:40:58 PM »
ReplyReply

Canson advises Premium Luster as the paper type, so Photo Black ink is the appropriate ink for their Platine Fibre Rag.

@KeithR - Museo's Silver Rag and Hahnemuhle's Photo Rag Baryta are two examples of 100% cotton paper that use Photo Black on their 'gloss' printing surface. Cotton does not indicate that Matte Black is the correct choice.

What I was referring to was that before papers such as Museo's Silver Rag or the Baryta papers came along, most papers that were labeled as cotton or rag were being sold(and talked about on many forums) as being for MK ink only. Many of the sales people that I came in contact with, said the same thing. When I picked up a package of the Canson Platine(last week), the salesman asked when I switched to MK. So as one that preferred the look from the PK inks, I had to stay with surfaces that used PK, that stated RC, or luster, or satin. I just plain didn't know any different because that was what was being said at that time. In my original post(back in February, all I really asked for was why couldn't the paper companies just make note on the package as to which ink is recommended instead of having to doing all kinds of research for such a simple piece of info, and not everyone has their computer with them(to do a search) when they stop in a store to check out what the paper actually looks like. And as I found out last week, not all the sales personnel are fully knowledgeable. I come across a lot of people that are new to digital and trying to doing their own printing and they ask the same questions. I've gained a lot of very helpful info here on LuLa and pass it along when I come across it, but I don't necessarily get to read all the posts so forgive me if I missed info along the way. Roll Eyes
Logged

The destination is our goal but itís the journey that educates us.
Sven W
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 514


« Reply #52 on: June 15, 2011, 02:09:13 AM »
ReplyReply

In my original post(back in February, all I really asked for was why couldn't the paper companies just make note on the package as to which ink is recommended instead of having to doing all kinds of research for such a simple piece of info, and not everyone has their computer with them(to do a search) when they stop in a store to check out what the paper actually looks like. And as I found out last week, not all the sales personnel are fully knowledgeable.

I totally agree on that.
It shouldn't be that hard for the manufacturers.

/Sven
Logged

Stockholm, Sweden
howardm
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 720


« Reply #53 on: June 15, 2011, 08:20:52 AM »
ReplyReply

has anyone bothered noticing that the NAME of the ICC profile includes that information?  'P_BK'

vs. the fine arts papers which are (as expected) M_BK
Logged
KeithR
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 629


« Reply #54 on: June 15, 2011, 04:44:50 PM »
ReplyReply

has anyone bothered noticing that the NAME of the ICC profile includes that information?  'P_BK'

vs. the fine arts papers which are (as expected) M_BK

That may be true and that info might be on the website. But lets say that you happen into a store that happens to have a new paper in stock(maybe some sample prints provided by the company) and you want to know which black is used. Do you think the store would allow you to access their computer to look for that info? I don't know how well stocked the stores you frequent are, but around here in the metro area of Minneapolis there is only ONE store that has a multitude of the top brands with samples to look at/compare and only one salesperson that has knowledge of the stock and he's not always around when I can get into that store. All I'm saying is that the info could be put on the packaging to make it easier for the customer to make an informed decision.
Logged

The destination is our goal but itís the journey that educates us.
howardm
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 720


« Reply #55 on: June 15, 2011, 06:32:27 PM »
ReplyReply

dont get me wrong, I agree w/ you.  But, when I look at samples at the shop, I have to expect that the mfgr used the same ink that the profile wants.  Those swatch packs w/o any image at all are somewhat useless (ala Epson)
Logged
Randy Carone
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 539


« Reply #56 on: June 15, 2011, 06:37:59 PM »
ReplyReply

If a paper is to use Matte Black the word matte should be in the paper name or somewhere on the box. I agree that it is sometimes difficult to tell if a paper has a gloss (gloss, semi-gloss, luster, satin, etc,) because the names don't always include that info, but most matte papers say so on the package.
Logged

Randy Carone
Christopher
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 944


WWW
« Reply #57 on: June 15, 2011, 09:49:22 PM »
ReplyReply

I did a lot on plexiglas, but switched to glas again. I never liked how plexiglas bends, yellows over time and just scratches to easily. My current solution is, Schott Mirogard plus. Personally I think there is nearly no better glass out there. However, the downside is that it is very expsnive.

I would never frame a print without protection, but that's only me.
Logged

Ernst Dinkla
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2805


« Reply #58 on: June 16, 2011, 02:39:02 AM »
ReplyReply

HP documents on what different media presets use of Z3100 inks and HP documents on the use of its media presets for third party papers make it easy to see what black, grey, ink combinations are used for a specific paper. And it does not matter much as all the inks are available on that model without any switch needed.

Then there is the great divide between all Baryta/Fiber/RC/Foil/Film qualities set against all matte Fine Art/plain matte coated inkjet/uncoated papers if is about MK or PK. With few exceptions.

met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst

New: Spectral plots of +250 inkjet papers:

http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm




Logged
narikin
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 854


« Reply #59 on: June 16, 2011, 05:40:56 AM »
ReplyReply

Ernst, with all due respect, perhaps there is a misunderstanding, but this isn't what I'm talking about. The issue raised in this thread that I'm addressing is whether the presence of the surface texture on the paper interferes with the viewers' appreciation of image detail. I believe this is not comparable to bronzing and gloss differential. And maybe I'm missing something, but when I look at a print straight-on, it seems like a pretty straightforward process to me. I position my eyes perpendicular to the print surface from a normal viewing distance, which is the normal way prints are meant to be looked at, and I see what I see.

I think what Ernst was pointing out, was simply that Bronzing or Gloss Differential is not a problem head on, but is a real problem at an angle. Everyone spends a lot of time and energy minimizing/ complaining/ fixing that.  But when it comes to surface stipple, which is not a problem head on, but is a real problem at an angle. some folks are deciding that it doesn't matter.  

Differing standards, to accommodate our bias  - that is his point, I believe.   And a good one too!
Logged
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad