Digital BW, The Print

Hi,
I'm planning to exhibit some Ultrachrome K2 murals and only have Enhanced Matte roll paper for my 2100. Can't afford a roll of Photo Rag ... am dubious about the Epson Premium Semi Gloss's bronzing ... and wondered if anyone could report back on whether UV protective glass will stop the yellowing of EEM.

It would be great to be able to print on this paper if it can be made more stable somehow.

The other option is to use my friend's Epson 4800 with Epson Semi-Matte ... but her markup would add to the price of the framed prints. As would the UV glass of course. 

Any thoughts?

thanks,
Richard
--
http://smallfield.vze.com
http://photos.smallfield.vze.com (Photos web site)
http://warkworth.vze.com/ (Warkworth photo essay)


   "The significant problems we face cannot be solved at
   the same level of thinking we were at when we created
   them." 
   --Albert Einstein (1879-1955)

Richard,

>... only have Enhanced Matte roll ... Can't afford a roll of Photo Rag ...
> ... and wondered if anyone could report back on whether UV 
> protective glass will stop the yellowing of EEM.

It'll slow the warming that is from the OBA dyes fading.  However, EEM also
seems to yellow from the acids in it -- eventually.  How long this will take
seems to depend on factors such as heat and humidity.  A framed acidic paper
might yellow faster than one that can breath or has a buffered backing to
capture the acids that come out of the paper.

>Any thoughts?

Does Premier Imaging have distribution down there?  As noted in my previous
post, I think its Premium Matte makes a good EEM substitute.  They seem to
be calling it "Matte BW" sometimes.  See
http://www.premierimagingproducts.com/pm_mattebw.php  

Cheap and good acid free paper is hard to find.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

Richard, I can understand limited budgets, but with all the work of matte
cutting, cost of frames, blah blah, I might look for another paper. What
about Red River Polar Matte? I have yet to see any yellowing with it what so
ever and it is affordable. 2100 does that mean you are not in US? 

 

Eric

 

Eric Neilsen Photography

4101 Commerce Street

Suite 9

Dallas, TX 75226

http://e.neilsen.home.att.net

http://ericneilsenphotography.com

Skype ejprinter

  _____  

From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Richard
Smallfield
Sent: Friday, November 10, 2006 12:11 AM
To: Digital BW Print
Subject: [Digital BW] EEM & UV glass?

 

Hi,
I'm planning to exhibit some Ultrachrome K2 murals and only have Enhanced
Matte roll paper for my 2100. Can't afford a roll of Photo Rag ... am
dubious about the Epson Premium Semi Gloss's bronzing ... and wondered if
anyone could report back on whether UV protective glass will stop the
yellowing of EEM.

It would be great to be able to print on this paper if it can be made more
stable somehow.

The other option is to use my friend's Epson 4800 with Epson Semi-Matte ...
but her markup would add to the price of the framed prints. As would the UV
glass of course. 

Any thoughts?

thanks,
Richard
--
http://smallfield. <http://smallfield.vze.com> vze.com
http://photos. <http://photos.smallfield.vze.com> smallfield.vze.com (Photos
web site)
http://warkworth. <http://warkworth.vze.com/> vze.com/ (Warkworth photo
essay)





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

Just peeked at your site. I have no idea of what papers you can get down
under. Or your price structure for those you can. Good luck. 

 

Eric Neilsen Photography

4101 Commerce Street

Suite 9

Dallas, TX 75226

http://e.neilsen.home.att.net

http://ericneilsenphotography.com

Skype ejprinter

  _____  

From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Richard
Smallfield
Sent: Friday, November 10, 2006 12:11 AM
To: Digital BW Print
Subject: [Digital BW] EEM & UV glass?

 

Hi,
I'm planning to exhibit some Ultrachrome K2 murals and only have Enhanced
Matte roll paper for my 2100. Can't afford a roll of Photo Rag ... am
dubious about the Epson Premium Semi Gloss's bronzing ... and wondered if
anyone could report back on whether UV protective glass will stop the
yellowing of EEM.

It would be great to be able to print on this paper if it can be made more
stable somehow.

The other option is to use my friend's Epson 4800 with Epson Semi-Matte ...
but her markup would add to the price of the framed prints. As would the UV
glass of course. 

Any thoughts?

thanks,
Richard
--
http://smallfield. <http://smallfield.vze.com> vze.com
http://photos. <http://photos.smallfield.vze.com> smallfield.vze.com (Photos
web site)
http://warkworth. <http://warkworth.vze.com/> vze.com/ (Warkworth photo
essay)

"The significant problems we face cannot be solved at
the same level of thinking we were at when we created
them." 
--Albert Einstein (1879-1955) 

 



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

Hello Richard,

>I'm planning to exhibit some Ultrachrome K2 murals and only have
>Enhanced Matte roll paper for my 2100. Can't afford a roll of 
>Photo Rag ... am dubious about the Epson Premium Semi Gloss's 
>bronzing ... and wondered if anyone could report back on whether 
>UV protective glass will stop the yellowing of EEM.
>It would be great to be able to print on this paper if it can be 
>made more stable somehow.

How long will it be on display, and what will happen to it after the
exhibit?  If it's not meant to be permanent then you might want to go
ahead with the EEM.   I say this because I have an EEM print (actually
the original EAM with the "Epson + arrow" on the back) that has been
on my windowsill (some direct sunlight every day + very bright
daylight all day) for just over three years now.  From my observations
I can say these things:

- the "yellowing" isn't really the color yellow, but is more like a
very warm cream white natural paper.  It is a bit warmer than Merlin
Natural (the only natural paper I have to compare with).  So it isn't
really extreme looking.

- the color is even, not at all spotty, blotchy or streaked, and I
don't recall seeing any unevenness as it yellowed in the early days
when I watched it frequently.

- I can't measure the yellowing, but my impression is that it reached
a certain point fairly quickly (a few weeks or months) and then
stopped.  It's been three years now and I don't have any sense of it
having continued to change after that initial period.

- there is no sign of the kind of brownish yellow color that is
usually associated with acid staining.  No spots or darkened edges. 
It just looks like a very warm paper.  I have no idea how long it
would take before acid stains would appear.


So, assuming that the current EEM will exhibit these same
characteristics as this older EAM, it might be an ok paper for this use.

BTW, this windowsill print is my Eboni BO test print and after three
years of some direct sunlight every day still shows no sign of fading
(it's partially covered by a 1" wide strip of 4-ply matt board).

Regards,
Clayton


Info on black and white digital printing at    
http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Richard
Smallfield <r.smallfield@...> wrote:

> Any thoughts?
> 


Well since one of the other posters mentioned you are in Australia,
you might want to get some Breathing Color Sterling paper. I've used
the Sterling 2xx gsm paper, and it is pretty good. Not quite as much
punch as EEM, but it also doesn't have the brighteners in it. And it
is really inexpensive. I know there is a Breathing Color dealer
somewhere down there.

> 
> So, assuming that the current EEM will exhibit these same
> characteristics as this older EAM, it might be an ok paper for this use.
> 
> 

IMO that's not a reasonable "assumption" in view of the time and money
that goes into making important prints. 

Think what an embarassment it would/should be, if someone actually
buys one, with you knowing what sometimes/often/usually/always (?)
happens to an EEM print within a year or so. 

I feel bad about using EEM in the past. I'd like to retrieve all of
mine and reprint on respectable paper, but I'm not that ethical. 

I don't particularly recommend them to anyone else, but my own matte
choices are now narrowed to Moab Entrada and Kayenta, which I've used
for two years. But that's a matter of personal aesthetics. I'm not
interested in comparison to EEM OR to silver photo paper. Beautiful
with 2200/UT7 or 2200/Epson pigments. (the famous "flaking" that Moab
suffered in the past was packaging dust, which was well known early
on, and easily dealt with using canned air).

Hello Djon43,
 
>>So, assuming that the current EEM will exhibit these same
>>characteristics as this older EAM...

>IMO that's not a reasonable "assumption" in view of the time and 
>money that goes into making important prints.

The only assumption I made is that EEM will be like EAM.  Are you
saying that isn't reasonable?

 
>Think what an embarassment it would/should be, if someone actually
>buys one with you knowing what sometimes/often/usually/always (?)
>happens to an EEM print within a year or so. 

My suggestion was based on the conditional statement "If it's not
meant to be permanent...".  Perhaps you missed that.  Of course if
the print is advertised as archival then it shouldn't be used.  But if
not, then an EEM print could give at least three years of viewing
pleasure according to my test, probably more.  

That's what I was getting at when I listed my observations.  EEM
prints don't suddenly turn horrible looking.  The paper simply goes
warm rather quickly and then stops, and does it evenly without spots,
blotches or streaks, and can go at least three years without any acid
stains showing.  I was not trying to give bad advice.  I'm usually one
of the people who warns beginners against using EEM for archival prints.


>...knowing what sometimes/often/usually/always (?)
>happens to an EEM print within a year or so...

Another reason I outlined my observations is that it occurred to me
that perhaps many readers here _don't_ know what happens to an EEM
print.  About all that's said about it here is don't use it for
archival prints because it's not acid free and it yellows quickly.  My
test print has just passed the 3-year point and this seemed like a
good time to give a report on it.    

It's actually not all that bad looking, other than being warmer than
it started out. If you never saw the original you'd not know the
difference.  It's not nearly as yellow as the old Concord Rag which
lots of people liked (and ocasionally lament the loss of).  We don't
know how long it will take before acid stains appear.  Might be 5 or
10 years, might be next year - I've never heard or read anything about
that.  All I know is that it doesn't happen in 3 years.  I plan to
leave the test print on the windowsill indefinitely and will continue
to watch it.

Regards,
Clayton


Info on black and white digital printing at    
http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm

Hello Clayton.

If you ever take a look at an "estate auction" where many antiques--or
just antiquated--objects are sold you will usually see quite a few old
prints. Those from the early 1900s are generaly very yellow brownish
but not necessarily stained in patches etc. Many people are enamoured
of these and the nice ones sell very well with sometimes vigorous
bidding. Even acid containing papers may age fairly gracefully and
well outlive their owner. The stained and ugly ones are most often
photographs that were poorly processed or very poorly stored prints.
Old books of that era are another case in point.

I think you are correct in your view. One caveat, don't let EEM prints
lay around on a stack that is fanned out. The yellowing can occur very
rapidly and only on the uncovered part so would be extremely evident
in that case. This comes from my experience not conjecture.

Regards
Duane



--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Clayton Jones"
<cj@...> wrote:

>
> Hello Djon43,
>  
> >>So, assuming that the current EEM will exhibit these same
> >>characteristics as this older EAM...
> 
> >IMO that's not a reasonable "assumption" in view of the time and 
> >money that goes into making important prints.
> 
> The only assumption I made is that EEM will be like EAM.  Are you
> saying that isn't reasonable?
> 
>  
> >Think what an embarassment it would/should be, if someone actually
> >buys one with you knowing what sometimes/often/usually/always (?)
> >happens to an EEM print within a year or so. 
> 
> My suggestion was based on the conditional statement "If it's not
> meant to be permanent...".  Perhaps you missed that.  Of course if
> the print is advertised as archival then it shouldn't be used.  But if
> not, then an EEM print could give at least three years of viewing
> pleasure according to my test, probably more.  
> 
> That's what I was getting at when I listed my observations.  EEM
> prints don't suddenly turn horrible looking.  The paper simply goes
> warm rather quickly and then stops, and does it evenly without spots,
> blotches or streaks, and can go at least three years without any acid
> stains showing.  I was not trying to give bad advice.  I'm usually one
> of the people who warns beginners against using EEM for archival prints.
> 
> 
> >...knowing what sometimes/often/usually/always (?)
> >happens to an EEM print within a year or so...
> 
> Another reason I outlined my observations is that it occurred to me
> that perhaps many readers here _don't_ know what happens to an EEM
> print.  About all that's said about it here is don't use it for
> archival prints because it's not acid free and it yellows quickly.  My
> test print has just passed the 3-year point and this seemed like a
> good time to give a report on it.    
> 
> It's actually not all that bad looking, other than being warmer than
> it started out. If you never saw the original you'd not know the
> difference.  It's not nearly as yellow as the old Concord Rag which
> lots of people liked (and ocasionally lament the loss of).  We don't
> know how long it will take before acid stains appear.  Might be 5 or
> 10 years, might be next year - I've never heard or read anything about
> that.  All I know is that it doesn't happen in 3 years.  I plan to
> leave the test print on the windowsill indefinitely and will continue
> to watch it.
> 
> Regards,
> Clayton
> 
> 
> Info on black and white digital printing at    
> http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm
>

My modest proposal is to totally avoid EEM.  In fact, boycott all acidic
papers.

 

When acid free papers like Premier BW (also known as Premier Matte, Dual
Sided Matte -- see http://www.premierimagingproducts.com/pm_mattebw.php) can
be purchased for as cheap as EEM 

(see, e.g.,
http://www.itsupplies.com/cgi-bin/itsupplies.storefront/45562fb80418e7f62741
4200c149062b/Catalog/1623), why take the risk that a print might end up
being one you want to keep for a while?  Maybe your kids will even someday
see value in what you now think is just a proof or snapshot.

 

I'm not pushing PremierArt, but the fact that they can make a paper this
good for this price shows what can be done.  We should not settle for less
nor pay outrageous prices for cellulose - the most abundant organic
substance in the biosphere.  Paying over 5 times more for HPR does not make
my photos better.

 

(OK, I'll get off the soap box.)

 

Paul

www.PaulRoark.com <http://www.paulroark.com/>  

 



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

Paul, Duane,

>My modest proposal is to totally avoid EEM.  
>...why take the risk that a print might end up being one you want 
>to keep for a while?  Maybe your kids will even someday see value 
>in what you now think is just a proof or snapshot.

I agree completely.  Myself, I only use it for proofs.  The only
reason I said that to Richard is because there seemed to be a hint of
desperation in his situation, and if it was something temporary then
EEM could let him squeak by in the show without having to lay out a
bundle of sheckels for a roll just to make one print.  But if it's for
sale then forget it - it'll come back and bite you some day.  Even for
little freebie snaps for friends I use Kayenta.  I probably shouldn't
have said anything, my apologies.

Duane, thanks for the comment about old photos at auction - very
interesting stuff.

I'm still keeping the test print on the windowsill and will report if
anything changes.

Regards,
Clayton


Info on black and white digital printing at    
http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm

Hi Paul.
I have to agree with you also. The Premier paper is my favorite for
B&W due to it's nice d'max and visual scale and price point. On the
other hand I couldn't bring myself to throw away a 100ft roll of EEM I
already had on hand, so I used it up in getting my 7000 back up and
running this summer.
I have a new summer home with empty walls to fill and couldn't get the
Premier space in the vehicle going north last spring :) The EEM is
gone now and won't be replaced. I promise :}

Regards
Duane


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark"
<paul.roark@...> wrote:
>
> My modest proposal is to totally avoid EEM.  In fact, boycott all acidic
> papers.
> 
>  
> 
> When acid free papers like Premier BW (also known as Premier Matte, Dual
> Sided Matte -- see
http://www.premierimagingproducts.com/pm_mattebw.php) can
> be purchased for as cheap as EEM 
> 
> (see, e.g.,
>
http://www.itsupplies.com/cgi-bin/itsupplies.storefront/45562fb80418e7f62741
> 4200c149062b/Catalog/1623), why take the risk that a print might end up
> being one you want to keep for a while?  Maybe your kids will even
someday
> see value in what you now think is just a proof or snapshot.
> 
>  
> 
> I'm not pushing PremierArt, but the fact that they can make a paper this
> good for this price shows what can be done.  We should not settle
for less
> nor pay outrageous prices for cellulose - the most abundant organic
> substance in the biosphere.  Paying over 5 times more for HPR does
not make

> my photos better.
> 
>  
> 
> (OK, I'll get off the soap box.)
> 
>  
> 
> Paul
> 
> www.PaulRoark.com <http://www.paulroark.com/>  
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

Hi Paul,
At 10:16 AM Sunday 11/12/2006, you wrote:
>My modest proposal is to totally avoid EEM. In fact, boycott all acidic
>papers.

I have a 30' roll now, unfortunately ... I bought it for proofing, not realising that the Premier Matte was so cheap. It may make international shipping worth the cost ... and my initial question about what matte 13" roll paper was available has been answered by the website you linked to: 
http://www.itsupplies.com/cgi-bin/itsupplies.storefront/455b225f00fda1ac27414200c1490624/Product/View/8521&2D1333

There is a 13" 33' roll available there for US$14.99. That is cheaper and better than EEM.

>When acid free papers like Premier BW (also known as Premier Matte, Dual
>Sided Matte -- see http://www.premierimagingproducts.com/pm_mattebw.php) can
>be purchased for as cheap as EEM, why take the risk that a print might end up
>being one you want to keep for a while? Maybe your kids will even someday
>see value in what you now think is just a proof or snapshot.

I will see if it is economical to ship this paper to NZ. I would be interested in what people are paying for shipping rolls of paper ... it's so heavy.

>I'm not pushing PremierArt, but the fact that they can make a paper this
>good for this price shows what can be done. We should not settle for less
>nor pay outrageous prices for cellulose - the most abundant organic
>substance in the biosphere. Paying over 5 times more for HPR does not make
>my photos better.

Thanks Paul ... I've emailed itsupplies to see what the freight would cost.

Richard

--
http://smallfield.vze.com
http://photos.smallfield.vze.com (Photos web site)
http://warkworth.vze.com/ (Warkworth photo essay)


  Nobody made a greater mistake than he who did
  nothing because he could do only a little. 
  --Edmund Burke, statesman and writer (1729-1797)

At 02:25 PM Saturday 11/11/2006, you wrote:
>Well since one of the other posters mentioned you are in Australia,
>you might want to get some Breathing Color Sterling paper.

Ahem. New Zealand!!! 

But thanks - I'm looking into this paper. Looks promising.

Rich

--
http://smallfield.vze.com
http://photos.smallfield.vze.com (Photos web site)
http://warkworth.vze.com/ (Warkworth photo essay)


   "This above all: to thine own self be true.
   And it must follow, as the night the day, 
   Thou canst not then be false to any man." 
   --Shakespeare, Hamlet I:3

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Richard Smallfield 
<r.smallfield@...> wrote:
> Ahem. New Zealand!!! 
> 
> But thanks - I'm looking into this paper. Looks promising.
> 
> Rich


Sorry, no edit button so I couldn't fix that when I figured it out.