Harman FB Al seems to be gone...

[JimCollum]

i'm sure the lack of fixer smell is due to the paper base being changed. The original used the same stock as Ilford Multigrade Fiber photo paper, just without a silver coating. (an inkjet receptor layer instead). Opening a box of the photo paper, you get exactly the same smell. I'm sure if Hahnemühle has taken over, they no longer are using the Ilford paper base. My guess is that there's been some falling out between Ilford and Harmon

 

[ustein]

Jack,
I think that is due to the OBA overdose or at least that contributes
-bob

And the original paper had already plenty of OBAs.

106% in the blue.

 

[Jack]

Update: After some back and forth between Hahnemuhle who is assuring me that the papers are identical, I tried one more thing --- I printed the new stuff out using the original Harman FBAL profile that uses Epson PPP Gloss as the paper base. (The Harm/Hahn Gloss Baryta profile is clearly different and uses Epson PPP Luster as the base.) The result is much closer, and now "good enough" for me to agree it's a viable replacement.

HOWEVER! The new stuff still does not smell the same as the original coming off the printer, so I am relatively certain *something* in the end products is "different."

 

[ustein]

Jack, glad I could help a bit to solve this mystery ( by connecting Jack with Harman).

Keep us updated.

 

[HARMAN technology Ltd]

COMPANY STATEMENT

HARMAN by Hahnemühle Gloss Baryta and Gloss Baryta Warmtone


HARMAN technology Limited uses a traditional photographic baryta fibre base in the manufacture of HARMAN by Hahnemühle inkjet papers, GLOSS BARYTA and GLOSS BARYTA WARMTONE.

This is the same baryta base used in our traditional black and white exhibition quality photographic papers. GLOSS BARYTA and GLOSS BARYTA WARMTONE were designed using this key element in order to give users a unique product with the look and feel of a true photographic baryta paper

There has been no change to the Baryta base, or the coating formulation used in the manufacture of Gloss Baryta 320gsm and Gloss Baryta Warmtone 320gsm for the HARMAN by Hahnemühle product range.

The products manufactured for this range are the same as those used in the previous manufacture of HARMAN PHOTO PROFESSIONAL GLOSS FB Al 320gsm and HARMAN PHOTO PROFESSIONAL GLOSS FB Al WARMTONE 320gsm.

At HARMAN technology we regularly review our test processes and keep a comprehensive archive of test results. These results confirm that the products are the same today, as when they were originally launched in 2007.

There is and never has been any intention to change the design of these products.

Any change to the design or formulation of our products will be communicated to the market and consumer via our usual established routes.

Consumers using the new print profiles downloaded from the Hahnemühle website, may notice a change in product performance. For enquiries of this nature, please contact Hahnemühle Technical Service directly for support.

 

[lozoyad]

Interesting comment by Hahnemuhle on the Harman by Hahnemuhle Gloss Baryta 320. Unfortunately I never had the opportunity to test the old Harman paper. However, I find the new paper very much to my liking. First, after reading this thread I tried the old Harmon profile and correct media type...I found that my test image had too much magenta in the sky (no I didn't double profile). So then I tried the new Hahnemuhle's profile intended for this paper and it was spot on (Solux viewing) for my Epson 3880. Liked it enough to order a 17x49 roll.

The only downside I see for this or any baryta paper is that they scratch too easily.

 

[Jack]

Welcome to the forum Harman! Your input and presence here is appreciated.

 

[weinschela]

I'm happy to hear the paper is unchanged; very much my favorite. But Harman made it in 17 x 25 sheets, which to me are better proportoned than 17 x 22 and my understanding is they have discontinued 17x25. If this is so, does anyone have a recommendation for something close that is made in that size? So far all I have found is Red River which is different and is on thinner stock and there seem to be no other choices. Are there any euro sizes out there that could be tried? Thanks

P.s. Using Epson 3800 so no rolls, just cut sheets.

 

[JimCollum]

I have my box of the new Warmtone in hand (interesting.. it comes in boxes of 30 sheets). Opening the box, and removing a sheet.. it has a slight smell of Baryta. but not nearly as strong as the Ilford version. Feels about the same thickness (didn't measure though). The new version looks a little warmer than the Iford.. I'll need to get my reflection hectometer out and measure to make sure.. also try the dmax as well). The surface is different. The new paper seems to have a bit more 'tooth' for want of a better word... not quite as smooth as the Ilford paper.

I'm not sure what the Harmon rep was looking at.. but the two papers I have in hand here are *not* the same ('same' doesn't mean close.. it means identical). I print with an HP z3100, so it will create it's own profiles. I used the one i did for the Ilford paper, and the prints seem pretty close. I printed one of my 'toned' b/w prints first, so it wouldn't be as easy to check with a dead neutral print on both stocks.. I'll try that tomorrow.

 

[Jack]

That is my experience too Jim, even with the regular white version. The surface looks slightly different, more tooth as you say, and the color is visibly different with the new stuff being whiter. I even showed blind samples o a few folks after the above rep comment and asked if they were both the same color. Everybody's picked the new stuff as whiter...

Notwithstanding, the old Ilford profile is significantly better with it than the one Hahnemuhle has up on it's site.

 

[thompsonkirk]

One question, one comment:

Question: Now that there's been time to get used to the change, what media setting turned out to work best for the new paper, PPP Glossy or PPP Luster? (I use a Canon 6300 & will be needing a new custom profile, & would like to get the media setting right!)

Comment/opinion: I too am always unhappy when a preference or habit has to change. But couldn't a slightly less glossy surface on the Harman Warmtone be a gain?

My 'gold standard' for a paper surface has always been Portriga Rapid 111, lightly selenium-toned for archival preservation. (I still have a Zone System scale printed out on it, & protect it like an archival print.) And because Harman Warmtone matched it better than any other paper, that was my choice when not using HPR.

But the main difference between PR111 & HarWT was that the latter was a bit slicker on its surface. The match was perfect for paper-base tone, & with a little bit of split-toning I could match the slight duo-tone look from diluted selenium toner, but the surface didn't quite match. In fact the Epson Exhibition Fiber paper was a better surface match (looks just like Brovira 111!), though its OBAs weren't acceptable.

So if the new HarWT is just a bit less glossy than the Ilford version, then might that not be a gain – assuming others are on pretty much the same gold standard'?

(I'm stating this hypothetically, without using the new paper yet – I had a good supply of the old version.)

Kirk

PS, what does bother me is disappearance of the 17x25 size. The Harman gloss papers were so stiff that I got occasional head strikes at the end of a roll (on Canon 5100), & so switched to the sheets. I do wish this size were revived, because it's a better fit for full-frame 2:3 images. (And while praying for gifts from the paper gods, how about making A4 available in the US, for the same reason?)

K

 

[Jack]

One question, one comment:

Question: Now that there's been time to get used to the change, what media setting turned out to work best for the new paper, PPP Glossy or PPP Luster? (I use a Canon 6300 & will be needing a new custom profile, & would like to get the media setting right!)

I have found that my original Harman profile works better than the new one for whatever reason, and it used PPPGlossy for it substrate, at least with the Epson profile. FWIW, I have basically abandoned the "new" harman as no matter what I do, I simply cannot get the same look/feel as the old Harman. My new paper of preference is Epson Exhibition FIber.

Cheers,

 

[thompsonkirk]

Thanks for the info, though I'm sorry to hear it. I liked the WT & didn't go for the Epson OBs. But I guess that's where I'll go for new work, & save my WT for prints that don't have to match the older ones.

Kirk

 

[archiM44]

I also found the new Harman paper giving me too ruddy skin tones and a very slight magenta cast in neutrals compared to my calibrated screen and in comparison to the former version.
I printed the same image on my Epson 3800 on Permajet Fiber Based Royal 325 (cheaper alternative here in Holland) using the profile I made for it with the i1 and got a perfect match with the screen as I used to.
I then printed the new Harman with the same settings (glossy and the permajet profile) and again got a print that was as expected.
My supplier here in Holland has always insisted that there are only a very few paper manufacturers and that some brands purchase from the same paper mill and has constantly been steering me to a cheaper alternative which according to him was the same base. I never listened but as they now all smell the same, I wonder.
maurice