Digital BW, The Print

Ok, made a bunch of 7660 prints on the hp Premium Plus glossy that 
look really good.  The driver is very accurate and the tonality of 
the prints is great.  Everyone I've showed them to thinks they look 
better than my 1160 MIS VM mw prints (hard to accept given all the 
effort that went into making them)... and this is after I go out of 
my way to point out the slight greenish tint under certain lighting.  
The depth of shadow detail is significantly greater than I've seen 
out of pigment prints.

The thing that concerns me is that the paper seems to like to buckle 
and curl so just hanging the prints behind a matt is not going to 
work.  How has anyone mounted this stuff?  Is that funky weird stuff 
on the back a problem?

thanks in advance,

mark

>Ok, made a bunch of 7660 prints on the hp Premium Plus glossy that
>look really good.  The driver is very accurate and the tonality of
>the prints is great.  Everyone I've showed them to thinks they look
>better than my 1160 MIS VM mw prints (hard to accept given all the
>effort that went into making them)... and this is after I go out of
>my way to point out the slight greenish tint under certain lighting.
>The depth of shadow detail is significantly greater than I've seen
>out of pigment prints.
>
>The thing that concerns me is that the paper seems to like to buckle
>and curl so just hanging the prints behind a matt is not going to
>work.  How has anyone mounted this stuff?  Is that funky weird stuff
>on the back a problem?

Mark -

I haven't mounted any, but I did find that they can be flattened slightly
by using a dry-mounting press on the lowest possible temperature. More
experiment would probably determine the correct time/temperature
combination, but the ink/paper combination appears to be robust.

One way to get around the problem entirely, and to make even better-looking
prints, is to use Ilford Galerie Classic paper. I tried some over the
weekend: it's another swellable-polymer surface so it absorbs and
encapsulates the dye inks and _should_ therefore be fairly durable. It also
swells MUCH less than the HP and has better shadow detail and really
imperceptible gloss differential. If somebody (Paul, are you listening?)
will please tell me that this stuff will last at least as long as a toned
black-and-white RC print, I'm off to buy a couple 100-sheet boxes and try
to unload all the HP Premium Plus I stockpiled...

-- Nick

NICHOLAS HARTMANN
Technical and scientific translator
(414) 271-4890
nh@...
http://www.nhartmann.com

> 
> Am I maybe confused.  I thought HP paper was only for thermal head printers,
> but I know some paper (H. Photo Rag) can be used optimally on both.  Anyway,
> is the Galerie Classic OK for thermal heads (HP)?  J Vee
> 
> One way to get around the problem entirely, and to make even better-looking
> prints, is to use Ilford Galerie Classic paper. I tried some over the
> weekend: it's another swellable-polymer surface so it absorbs and
> encapsulates the dye inks and _should_ therefore be fairly durable. It also
> swells MUCH less than the HP and has better shadow detail and really
> imperceptible gloss differential. If somebody (Paul, are you listening?)
> will please tell me that this stuff will last at least as long as a toned
> black-and-white RC print, I'm off to buy a couple 100-sheet boxes and try
> to unload all the HP Premium Plus I stockpiled...
> 
> -- Nick
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Mark, under what kind of lighting are you seeing a green tint?  And
are you seeing it with all of your prints or just some.  I have not
had much chance to crank out a lot of B&W on my 7660 yet, but what I
have done has shown no color cast that I can see under fluorescent,
incandecent, or natrual light.

Nick, Wilhelm tests show the Ilford Classic Galerie to be good for
20-30 years, and HP Premium Plus for about 70 years.  Although I am
very interested to hear what Paul finds in his fade tests.

Rad

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Nicholas Hartmann
<POLYGLOT@E...> wrote:
> >Ok, made a bunch of 7660 prints on the hp Premium Plus glossy that
> >look really good.  The driver is very accurate and the tonality of
> >the prints is great.  Everyone I've showed them to thinks they look
> >better than my 1160 MIS VM mw prints (hard to accept given all the
> >effort that went into making them)... and this is after I go out of
> >my way to point out the slight greenish tint under certain lighting.
> >The depth of shadow detail is significantly greater than I've seen
> >out of pigment prints.
> >
> >The thing that concerns me is that the paper seems to like to buckle
> >and curl so just hanging the prints behind a matt is not going to
> >work.  How has anyone mounted this stuff?  Is that funky weird stuff
> >on the back a problem?
> 
> Mark -
> 
> I haven't mounted any, but I did find that they can be flattened
slightly
> by using a dry-mounting press on the lowest possible temperature. More
> experiment would probably determine the correct time/temperature
> combination, but the ink/paper combination appears to be robust.
> 
> One way to get around the problem entirely, and to make even
better-looking
> prints, is to use Ilford Galerie Classic paper. I tried some over the
> weekend: it's another swellable-polymer surface so it absorbs and
> encapsulates the dye inks and _should_ therefore be fairly durable.
It also
> swells MUCH less than the HP and has better shadow detail and really
> imperceptible gloss differential. If somebody (Paul, are you listening?)
> will please tell me that this stuff will last at least as long as a
toned
> black-and-white RC print, I'm off to buy a couple 100-sheet boxes
and try

> to unload all the HP Premium Plus I stockpiled...
> 
> -- Nick
> 
> NICHOLAS HARTMANN
> Technical and scientific translator
> (414) 271-4890
> nh@n...
> http://www.nhartmann.com

I see it under fluorescent lighting, but really, the paper itself has 
a bit of a yellow cast and is really what I think is giving the 
prints the color cast and not a typical inkjet metamerism.  If you 
walk around with a hp print and a traditional b&w print for reference 
you will see it though.

Yeah, that's the rub.  With hp paper and Wilhelm results you can 
argue 100+ years, with anything else you are stuck making some flimsy 
personal replacement guarentee or something.

Mounting is a problem though.  For archival purposes most people 
don't like photos mounted even though they hang much better when they 
are, especially these hp prints.  Maybe hang mounted prints and give 
the buyer the option to get it unmouted if they prefer.  Isn't this 
an issue for anyone else?  In general, are people still dry mounting 
or just hinge or corner mounting photos?

mark

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Radimus" 
<radimus@p...> wrote:
> Mark, under what kind of lighting are you seeing a green tint?  And
> are you seeing it with all of your prints or just some.  I have not
> had much chance to crank out a lot of B&W on my 7660 yet, but what I
> have done has shown no color cast that I can see under fluorescent,
> incandecent, or natrual light.
> 
> Nick, Wilhelm tests show the Ilford Classic Galerie to be good for
> 20-30 years, and HP Premium Plus for about 70 years.  Although I am
> very interested to hear what Paul finds in his fade tests.
> 
> Rad
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Nicholas 
Hartmann
> <POLYGLOT@E...> wrote:
> > >Ok, made a bunch of 7660 prints on the hp Premium Plus glossy 
that
> > >look really good.  The driver is very accurate and the tonality 
of
> > >the prints is great.  Everyone I've showed them to thinks they 
look
> > >better than my 1160 MIS VM mw prints (hard to accept given all 
the
> > >effort that went into making them)... and this is after I go out 
of
> > >my way to point out the slight greenish tint under certain 
lighting.
> > >The depth of shadow detail is significantly greater than I've 
seen
> > >out of pigment prints.
> > >
> > >The thing that concerns me is that the paper seems to like to 
buckle
> > >and curl so just hanging the prints behind a matt is not going to
> > >work.  How has anyone mounted this stuff?  Is that funky weird 
stuff
> > >on the back a problem?
> > 
> > Mark -
> > 
> > I haven't mounted any, but I did find that they can be flattened
> slightly
> > by using a dry-mounting press on the lowest possible temperature. 
More
> > experiment would probably determine the correct time/temperature
> > combination, but the ink/paper combination appears to be robust.
> > 
> > One way to get around the problem entirely, and to make even
> better-looking
> > prints, is to use Ilford Galerie Classic paper. I tried some over 
the
> > weekend: it's another swellable-polymer surface so it absorbs and
> > encapsulates the dye inks and _should_ therefore be fairly 
durable.
> It also
> > swells MUCH less than the HP and has better shadow detail and 
really
> > imperceptible gloss differential. If somebody (Paul, are you 
listening?)
> > will please tell me that this stuff will last at least as long as 
a

> toned
> > black-and-white RC print, I'm off to buy a couple 100-sheet boxes
> and try
> > to unload all the HP Premium Plus I stockpiled...
> > 
> > -- Nick
> > 
> > NICHOLAS HARTMANN
> > Technical and scientific translator
> > (414) 271-4890
> > nh@n...
> > http://www.nhartmann.com

>> Am I maybe confused.  I thought HP paper was only for thermal head printers,
>> but I know some paper (H. Photo Rag) can be used optimally on both.  Anyway,
>> is the Galerie Classic OK for thermal heads (HP)?  J Vee

The printers being discussed here are HP's "Photosmart" series, which use
dye-based inks. I'm not sure what you mean by "thermal heads": there is a
difference among inkjet printers in terms of the technology by which ink
droplets are produced (a tiny pulse of heat vs. a tiny shove from a
piezoelectric element), but that doesn't affect the droplet itself. In any
case, HP Premium Plus paper is recommended for HP Photosmart printers, and
it's quite nice, although I'm finding I prefer the results on Ilford
Galerie Classic.

-- Nick

NICHOLAS HARTMANN
Technical and scientific translator
(414) 271-4890
nh@...
http://www.nhartmann.com

>Nick, Wilhelm tests show the Ilford Classic Galerie to be good for
>20-30 years, and HP Premium Plus for about 70 years.  Although I am
>very interested to hear what Paul finds in his fade tests.

Could be worse; besides, I'd bet those results refer to color images. In
any case, I'm using the HP only for pictures that get sent to family and
friends, i.e. glorified snapshots, which I used to print on RC paper with a
mild selenium-toner bath as a vague gesture toward archival keeping
properties. Any inkjet paper/ink combination that approaches B&W RC
lifespan is OK by me.

-- Nick

NICHOLAS HARTMANN
Technical and scientific translator
(414) 271-4890
nh@...
http://www.nhartmann.com

As I understand it, inkjet print heads are either piezoelectric or
thermoelectric.  I think their are adavantages and disadvantages to each.
HP wide format printers are (at least in the past) known for their high
quality thermal head printers.  ColorSpan (my printer)  uses HP thermal
heads on their printers, thus my interest in your post.
    J Vee



On 2/16/04 3:05 PM, "Nicholas Hartmann" <POLYGLOT@...> wrote:
> 
> 
> The printers being discussed here are HP's "Photosmart" series, which use
> dye-based inks. I'm not sure what you mean by "thermal heads": there is a
> difference among inkjet printers in terms of the technology by which ink
> droplets are produced (a tiny pulse of heat vs. a tiny shove from a
> piezoelectric element), but that doesn't affect the droplet itself. In any
> case, HP Premium Plus paper is recommended for HP Photosmart printers, and
> it's quite nice, although I'm finding I prefer the results on Ilford
> Galerie Classic.
> 
> -- Nick



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]