The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Ok so my Harman Gloss supplies are almost gone....

GRW

New member
My cupboard is nearly bare of my lovely "original" Harman Gloss :(, just like Jack and the guys in the other thread I'm not convinced the "new" paper is quite the same.

So looking on this in a positive manner I've set off thinking you never know there may be something better or exciting out there (OK maybe I'm being a little over zelous)

Anyone tried a German paper called Tecco? ( http://www.tecco.de ) . I've seen the odd review and people seem genuinley quite exited about it. Paticularly the BTG300 Barty Glossy sem to get a bit of a thumbs up and it's just made its way to the UK.

I'm open to all suggestions to give it a whirl and see what works for me, any comments on what working well with the Epson 7900 would be appreciated (not that I have one yet but my will power is very weak just now and I think I see one on the horizon:grin: )


Grame

Graeme
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
My own tastes have shifted -- or rather I've been forced to shift them :( Anyway, my paper of preference is now Epson Exhibition Fiber. It isn't like Harman in that it has a more textured surface, but it is another paper that reminds me of traditional photographic material...
 

GRW

New member
Thanks Jack, I' gonna give the Epson a go again. I did try it a while back but and wasn't sold. But nothing ventured nothing gained and all that jazz

G
 

Christopher

Active member
I still think HM PhotoRag Pearl is one of the nicest papers out there. Yes, it is very expensive but I really love how it feels and looks.
 

GRW

New member
I still think HM PhotoRag Pearl is one of the nicest papers out there. Yes, it is very expensive but I really love how it feels and looks.
Thanks Christopher, I don't print massive quantities so cost isn't a big deal. Another added to my list of possible contenders:thumbup:

Thanks
Graeme
 

dogstarnyc

Member
I'm an Ilford Gold Fibre man myself but I agree with Jack and others about Exhibition Fiber... Now that it's realistically priced.
It is brighter though, the base white is bright, for my work it's too bright for B&W but for colour stuff, it's very very good.

Also of note to forum readers, Epson are running a 3 for 2 offer right now on their higher end papers, I've put the links on my blog

Essentially buy three packs or rolls and Epson will rebate you the third, it makes the cost per print really attractive now.

Steve
 

GRW

New member
I'm an Ilford Gold Fibre man myself but I agree with Jack and others about Exhibition Fiber... Now that it's realistically priced.
It is brighter though, the base white is bright, for my work it's too bright for B&W but for colour stuff, it's very very good.

Also of note to forum readers, Epson are running a 3 for 2 offer right now on their higher end papers, I've put the links on my blog

Essentially buy three packs or rolls and Epson will rebate you the third, it makes the cost per print really attractive now.

Steve
Thanks Steve,

In the Uk we rarely get rebate offers it's just not done here in the UK for some reason. I'm gonna give the Gold Fibre a go though

Graeme
 

robertwright

New member
has anyone found epson ex fibre to be flakey? I have had quite a few prints ruined because of pieces that come off after the print is through. I've started to wipe down the blank sheet first with a soft cloth to rid the surface of loose whatever it is- it might be part of the previous sheets backing.

PITA.

the new harman to me really isn't that different. still the best I think although the surface is soooo soft and scratches soooo easily- plus the ink really sits on the surface so you really have to protect it. you can smudge it with a finger.

agree that ex fibre is pretty white but after you get it matted it might not matter.
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
I dust every sheet of any photo paper before printing -- the smallest piece of paper lint will pop off after printing and ruin a print. Once I started blowing off the sheets with canned air, this problem disappeared.
 

D&A

Well-known member
I'm an Ilford Gold Fibre man myself but I agree with Jack and others about Exhibition Fiber... Now that it's realistically priced.
It is brighter though, the base white is bright, for my work it's too bright for B&W but for colour stuff, it's very very good.

Also of note to forum readers, Epson are running a 3 for 2 offer right now on their higher end papers, I've put the links on my blog

Essentially buy three packs or rolls and Epson will rebate you the third, it makes the cost per print really attractive now.

Steve
In the price/performance catagory of high end papar, I would also say that the Ilford Gold Fibre is a paper that has many favorable attributes that gives many of the pricer papers costing considerably more, a run for their money. I also like Epson's Exhibition, but I'm not sold 100% on it, even after using it quite a few times since it's introduction. Just some personal observations and preferences of mine.

Dave (D&A)
 

weinschela

Subscriber Member
Some more punctuation on Harman Gloss. Harman made it in 17 x 25, which is IMHO better proportioned than 17 x 22. Not any more. I have tried Red River but it is not close to Harman. Not bad just different. So i have two questions for the printing experts: (1) what do you use if you print 17 x 25?; and (2) is there by any chance a metric size clos(er) to 1725?


Thanks
 

weinschela

Subscriber Member
Harman Baryta Gloss (Harman by Hahnemuhle) is available again in 17 x 25. While there may be some differences between "old" Harman and HBH, I still like the paper very much, and have ordered some and I'm having Eric Chan do a profile.

The manufacturer says there was no change in the paper. I take as true the comments from some knowledgeable people here that there are some differences, but having tried it myself, my own sense is the differences, if any, are slight and this remains a very good paper, especially for printing large. Just my 2 cents.
 

jsparks

Member
I used to use a lot of Harmon Gloss. My old printer was an HP and I found that the Harmon was the only Baryta paper that was really compatible with the HP inks. The ink would pool up on the other papers and the prints would look very grainy.

After the HP started to have problems, I replaced it with an Epson 3880. I don't think the prints on Harmon look quite as good as the HP/Harmon prints did, but all the other Baryta papers look great compared to the results I got on the HP.

I recently tried a bunch Baryta papers and objected to the texture on most of the papers. I've made thousands of darkroom prints and I guess this affects my reaction to the Baryta papers. All the darkroom papers I used to use were fairly smooth and any texture they had was small featured and very uniform. Many of the Baryta papers I tried seem more like cold press watercolor papers with gloppy coating kind of smoothing out the largest bumps in the underlying paper. I find this pretty ugly. Give me smooth paper or get rid of the semi-glossy coating.

Anyway, I don't see much difference between the Harmon Gloss and the Harmon by Hahnemuhle paper as long as I use the same profile for both. I think the differences between them are somewhat due to batch to batch consistency problems and mainly differences in the standard profiles from the 2 companies.

I still like Harmon (and you can get it in 17x25 from Shades of Paper--haven't seen it anywhere else and still haven't seen it for the warmtone version). If I really want 17x25, I'm going to use Harmon (I guess I could cut paper from 17" rolls, but I'm not ready to do that yet). However, when I can use smaller paper, I have really started to like the Canson Baryta Photographique. It has less gloss than the Harmon, but the surface is still smooth and uniform. Even though the paper specs say it is lighter weight than the Harmon, the paper is stiffer and appears heavier. Harmon seems to show ripples in the surface where more ink is put down while the Canson is flat. The Canson is also quite a bit less expensive than the other Baryta papers.

I haven't printed much on them, but also liked the Ilford Gold Fibre Silk and the Epson Exhibition Fiber. I didn't care for any of the others I tried.
 

schuster

Active member
I've settled on Canson Baryta Photographique as my "glossy" stock on the Epson 7900. I like the tonal separation, color saturation, fine detail, short drying time, semi-gloss surface and low OBs (not zero, as I had thought). There's nothing I don't like about it in sheet form. On the other hand, in roll form the paper is like a coil of spring steel that puts up a helluva fight when you're trying to push the leading edge through the printer... then after printing, you really have to reverse roll it. (By the way... the heavy bar in the "D-Roller" was causing indentations on my glossy prints that looked like ripples. I replaced the stupid thing with a cardboard core from a roll of paper, and now no more ripples.)

The "flakes" that someone mentioned has become an increasingly repetitious problem with the Canson Baryta Photographique too. It might be an electrostatic issue. I don't get it with Hahnemühle PhotoRag 308, which is the matte stock I've settled on.

Speaking of Hahnemühle PhotoRag... I like the surface, it's very easy to work with, and max density is good for a matte, but I wish it were closer to Canson Baryta Photographique image quality. Any suggestions?

Back to "flakes" ... I think what we're seeing is the result of ink sprayed onto dust and tiny bits of whatever else is on the paper, and then when those bits fall off, we're left with white un-inked spots that look like the emulsion had lifted. Seems like Epson should be able to incorporate an air blower that would ride along in front of the print head to knock off the bits. The vacuum system is already there, so it shouldn't be too much of a stretch to engineer. Hitting sheets of paper with compressed air before printing is a pain in the butt, but apparently works. Paper on rolls is another story.
 
Last edited:

jsparks

Member
I was using Hahnemuehle PhotoRag with my HP printer where I thought it worked great. After trying several of the most recommended matte papers for Epson, I've switched to Epson Hot Press Bright on my Epson 3880. The Hp printer had much deeper blacks on matte paper than the Epson, but was very problematic with most glossy papers.

I have one print that I made on both Epson Hot Press and Canson Baryta Photographique and I prefer the print on the Epson paper (and I generally prefer glossy). In this print in particular, the blacks are not quite as deep as the Canson print, but the shadows are so much more open and with no reflections, the blacks actually look deeper.

John
 

schuster

Active member
...the blacks are not quite as deep as the Canson print, but the shadows are so much more open and with no reflections, the blacks actually look deeper.
John
I was getting detail-less dark tones as you've noticed with Photographique, until I opened them up in Light Room, while retaining the "Cibachrome/Ilfochrome blacks" where they should be... zone 0-1. (Anybody remember those terms from the old days?:toocool:)
 

Jan Brittenson

Senior Subscriber Member
I must have been the only Ciba Pearl fan in existence... And I remember developing my on Cibachromes, the total PITA with the miniscule amounts of chemistry used. I definitely remember brown spots. And the stinky smell.

Edit: and, oh, I also remember pin registering masks to make a useful print from even the flattest originals.
 
Top