Site Sponsors
Results 1 to 20 of 20

Thread: editor of LensWork says in latest edition ...

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    35
    Post Thanks / Like

    editor of LensWork says in latest edition ...

    Harmon Glossy Fiber AL paper with Epson K3 inks is as good or better than the silver gelatin prints they have done for years. See issue nbr 79 (Nov-Dec 2008). The editor says the inkjet technology and papers have finally caught up.

  2. #2
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: editor of LensWork says in latest edition ...

    Yep, and I agree. In fact, if you read the archives here and you will see Jim Collum and I called that very same paper last year right after it came out. In fact it is the paper we used and recommended on our printing workshop in Carmel.
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Reykjavik, Iceland
    Posts
    2,310
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    9

    Re: editor of LensWork says in latest edition ...

    I just tried the Harman today, and I am extremely impressed. I thought it would be difficult to show up Innova and Crane, but it appears to be even better! The gloss is the most realistic I have yet seen. I don't know if I would call it better than a fiber print yet, but it is certainly right up there. We will see how it handles resolution.

    I compared a 11x14 print from a 6x7 negative that I did on both traditional fiber paper and on inkjet fiber paper (Innova). The negative was scanned on an Imacon at 3200dpi, the maximum setting. Though the inkjet print looked great, it is very clear from looking at the print closely that the darkroom print had the finer detail. I don't know if this is the fault of the scanner, the paper, or photoshop's downrezzing process, but whatever it was, the film one still had the edge in resolution.

    (by the way, my printer is the 3800, the enlarging lens was the 90mm f/4.5 apo companon HM.
    My photos are here: http://www.stuartrichardson.com and more recent work here: http://stuartrichardson.tumblr.com/ Please have a look at my book!
    My lab is here: http://www.customphotolab.is and on facebook

  4. #4
    Subscriber & Workshop Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    1,178
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    414

    Re: editor of LensWork says in latest edition ...

    I said this in another thread but I'll repeat it here: The Harman tastes like photography!

  5. #5
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: editor of LensWork says in latest edition ...

    Quote Originally Posted by cmb_ View Post
    I said this in another thread but I'll repeat it here: The Harman tastes like photography!
    And smells like it too
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."

  6. #6
    Member JimGoshorn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    35
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: editor of LensWork says in latest edition ...

    When I worked in a darkroom, my favorite papers were Ilford Gallerie and Zone VI Brilliant. So I dug a few of them out and compared them to the Harman sample prints and from what I saw, the Harman is glossier (looks closer to ferrotyped vs. air dried) and cooler in tone. Love the smell though

    The best alternative I have seen is the Hahnemuhle Photo Rag Baryta. Similar sheen to my darkroom papers, just slightly warmer and a little more surface texture.

    Either one seems to be a compromise to one degree or another.

    Jim

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    N.S. Canada
    Posts
    2,010
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: editor of LensWork says in latest edition ...

    Will be unpacking my new 3800 later today, am downloading various profiles as we speak and have a 15 sheet testing pack of 8.5*11 FB AL ready to go - and some Fibre Silk and some other samples enroute.

    Looking fwd to seeing some results.

  8. #8
    Member JimGoshorn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    35
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: editor of LensWork says in latest edition ...

    Please pass along your observations after you've done some printing.

    Thanks!

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    N.S. Canada
    Posts
    2,010
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: editor of LensWork says in latest edition ...

    Will do. Still in setting up stage in between other chores but initial observations:

    - WELL packed. 101 sections of tape and some foam holding everything secure
    - Initial instructions are pretty self explanatory
    - Big (43lbs, 27" wide) and needs lots of room for extendable front paper recovery tray
    - Well thought-out. This is definitely a pro-level printer in function as well as name.
    - No USB or Ethernet cords (cross-over if direct to computer) supplied, so make sure you have a suitable length at end
    - Easy and quick to get installed and up and running (on Mac).
    - NICE to handle ink carts that large.
    - On printer menu system pretty simple.

    More to follow. Have only managed time for a quick head alignment so far.

  10. #10
    Senior Member Lars's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Sunnyvale, California
    Posts
    1,811
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    19

    Re: editor of LensWork says in latest edition ...

    Rob, I'm listening.

    BTW Jack, have you seen any resolution advantage in feeding the 3800 720dpi files vs 360dpi?

    Lars
    Monochrome: http://mochro.com

  11. #11
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: editor of LensWork says in latest edition ...

    Quote Originally Posted by Lars Vinberg View Post
    BTW Jack, have you seen any resolution advantage in feeding the 3800 720dpi files vs 360dpi?
    Nope. And printing at the best 2880 setting versus the faster 1440 shows very little to no gain as well. But, feeding it 360's over 300's or 240's does deliver a visibly crisper file, though you need to compare with your nose in the prints. Ironically, I cannot see any difference between 300 and 240, so as a matter of course I'll use either as size-appropriate for my larger prints.
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."

  12. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    N.S. Canada
    Posts
    2,010
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: editor of LensWork says in latest edition ...

    Update:

    Just a couple of quick 8.5 x11 B&W prints on Harman FB AL - VERY, VERY nice. Very reminiscent of darkroom paper. I'm stepping up here from el crappo budget printers, but my (scattered) take so far:

    - B&Ws have great tonality. Nothing away from the paper, but thank you PK, LK and LLK.
    - Nice resolution - smallest details are crisply rendered
    - FB AL really holds out the sharpest details and blacks are BLACK.
    - Usual inkjet artifacts - metarism, bronzing, gloss diff are effectively non-existent .
    - H FB AL closest thing to a wet print from an inkjet I've seen yet.
    - Printer comes with some Epson Premium Luster. Have yet to try a print on it, but has a slightly warmer tone than the WHITE FB AL and of course, less sheen. Still looks impressive.
    - Still awaiting my Gold Fiber Silk and Hahnemuhle sample pack, but are hopefully here today.
    - Printing using ABW very simple (photos were already B&W).
    - Used ABW paper profiles and tips from : http://people.csail.mit.edu/ericchan/dp/Epson3800/
    - Printer very quiet.

    Looking fwd to nailing down a suitable test photo (lots of detail, wide tonal range) and testing same on further papers. Also REALLY looking fwd to some larger prints. Hard to really appreciate the detail in a nice photo from say the 90 AA and 1Ds2 when downsized to under 8.5x11.

    Anyone have any output sharpening hints - or any other hints for that matter?

    I'll keep the watchers posted, but the synopsis so far - sweet as hell.

  13. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    534
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: editor of LensWork says in latest edition ...

    The Harman and Ilford Gold are both TOO glossy for my tastes, pushing the print into the realm of the old RC finish, imo. I still think one of the first of the new generation is still one of the best, the Crane Silver Rag. It has a bit of a mottle to it, but so did some of the silver papers. I also like the fact that it has no optical brighteners, ensuring the way you see it now is the way it will look in the future.

    The Hahnemuehle Baryta looks nice though have yet to actually print on it myself (just seen samples).

  14. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Reykjavik, Iceland
    Posts
    2,310
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    9

    Re: editor of LensWork says in latest edition ...

    The 3800 really is an amazing piece of technology for the price -- and lots of ink! I have not changed the ink in a year...I don't print massive amounts, generally saving it for my best images, but I still feel like I have gotten a huge amount of prints out of the ink cartridges thus far.

    edit: I posted at the same time as Charles -- I agree about Crane Silver Rag -- it was my favorite black and white paper before I tried Harman, and I think it still is for images that are more suited to a warmer tone. It is an outstanding paper.
    My photos are here: http://www.stuartrichardson.com and more recent work here: http://stuartrichardson.tumblr.com/ Please have a look at my book!
    My lab is here: http://www.customphotolab.is and on facebook

  15. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    N.S. Canada
    Posts
    2,010
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: editor of LensWork says in latest edition ...

    It really is nice to pick up an ink cart and feel the heft and the ink sloshing inside as you agitate before the install. Makes one feel a little better about the @#^& $/litre price of the stuff.

    So sick and tired of buying the glorified jewelry known as ink carts smaller printers require.

    When you factor the ink value shipped with the 3800 (standard) vs say 2880 or alike, the hardware cost difference is about the same as a packet of 17*25 FB AL.

  16. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    534
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: editor of LensWork says in latest edition ...

    You get even more savings with the 4800 and up models with the 220ml cartridges you can buy for those. The 3800 is a great printer but I'm glad I got the 4800 as I like the savings with the larger ink cartridges and the ability to use roll paper.

    But now that the 7900 is out I hope to find a good deal on a 7800 or 7880. Or maybe even go larger!

  17. #17
    Member JimGoshorn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    35
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: editor of LensWork says in latest edition ...

    Maybe it's just me but after looking at some color images done on the Harman I kept thinking that there was something reminiscent about the paper and then it dawned on me. Pale colors have some translucent qualities similar to the Cibachrome/Ilfochrome high gloss papers.

    The more that I look at the B&W prints, the more they look too cool. The other thing that bothers me is how easy it is to get images to look too sharp. Digital images often look sharper than analog images all on their own let alone using a paper that can accentuate that fact.

    I am waiting till this week to make any firm conclusions as my 7900 arrives Tuesday and that is supposed to print images sharper than the previous generations.

  18. #18
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: editor of LensWork says in latest edition ...

    Re the sharpness issue, you are definitely correct. However the easy solution is to NOT do any added output sharpening. I find the result very smooth and pleasant
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."

  19. #19
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    N.S. Canada
    Posts
    2,010
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: editor of LensWork says in latest edition ...

    Picked up some Hahnemuhle Baryta last night, so will keep how it compares to the FB AL

  20. #20
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    N.S. Canada
    Posts
    2,010
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: editor of LensWork says in latest edition ...

    Update for anyone interested (and this will be old hat for anyone but we pro-printer/paper newbies):

    - No issues at all so far
    - "Preview" unless using Epson (color) profiles or custom ABW profiles with B&W in ABW looks washed-out and essentially like crap vs. on-screen proof and prints. No biggie, but odd.
    - Other than that, sucker just goes like the everyready bunny.
    -Converting a a B&W image intended to go through ABW to grey gamma 2.2/1.8 gives a more accurate soft proof as gets rid of any minute color vestiges within a B&W image that ABW driver would have done (prior to any tinting within ABW of course). Try an RGH dropper test on a "B&W" image in Adobe RGB, etc before and after conversion to Grey Gamma. Minute R vs G vs B deltas in former and R=G=B in latter. Also looks dead-nuts neutral on screen in latter.

    Papers so far
    ---------------
    Epson Prem Luster.
    Does great job with color. Not so found of texture with B&Ws vs FB AL Gloss. Like the tint (cool). No feed issues.

    Harman GB AL Gloss
    The gold standard, so far, for B&Ws. Best detail, deep blacks, a shade warmer than Prem Lust. A bit cooler would be nice, but the detail and tonality within deep shadows is sweet. Haven't tried with color yet.

    Ilford Gold Fibre Silk
    Nice. Warmer than FB AL, smoother than Prem Luster. Called a semi-gloss but I'd say it's at the upper end of what I'd call SG. No feed issues. Nice, but no sure about the warmth - but that of course would based on subject/intent, etc. Just B&W so far.

    Fine Art Baryta
    Not pour moi. Not fond of the texture. Deep blacks. Cool tint. Has a curl out of-the-box that unless rolled-out causes head strikes. Hahnemuhle, unlike others, also doesn't enclose their paper within plastic inside the box - [email protected]#$.

    Have a Hahnemuhle 18 page Fine Art sample pack that have yet to try. However they don't include any @#$ datasheets (for paper thickness requirements -and some are THICK) for the 9 types of paper within (had to download) and they are not labeled (huh? in any way), so need to be careful not to get them out of order. Need to get some sleeves or 8.5x11 envelopes so can break-out the various samples.
    Last edited by robmac; 8th December 2008 at 15:26.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •