The Hahnemuhle Fine Art Baryta is good stuff. I have a couple of Magnum 8x10 prints at home and that's the paper they use. A shame its one of the most expensive papers you can buy, but you get what you pay for i suppose.
Hi Keith , First off all thank you for all the reviews. They have been a big help getting into the printing of things (again). I used to work in the graphics industry and we used Epson large format printers to simulate the final printing on press The question I have is this: Before actually profiling the printer/paper I had to run a ‘baseline’ test to make sure the printer will function within its operational standards. As far as I can remember it was a simple color scale that had to be measured and in case of a deviation adjust it on the printer. Can you explain why this is not needed with the printers you’ve tested. Thanks in advance and greetings from Amsterdam. Peter
Thanks What you're doing is calibrating the printer. Modern inkjet printers don't usually drift enough for this to be an issue. However... I happened to be talking with Epson today, about just this, since they do support calibration for some printers. I was unable to do this in my P5300 review, since the new [free] software ColorBase3 does not support using any spectrophotometer I possess. ColorBase2 works with four different ones I own... It supports the Epson P700 and P900 Why was I wondering about this? Someone asked me about why almost all profiles from a paper supplier printed a touch too magenta. This _might_ be due to their P900 being out of calibration. Now this is very rarely an issue these day, but worth looking at, especially if you are in a colour critical [proofing] situation.
Thanks for that Keith. So it’s possible to calibrate/ lineairize certain printers but hardly ever needed although you can never be sure unless one looks at print using the same lighting conditions and yes, I guess its more important when using a printer for proofing.
Keith, have you performed similar tests using the Canon 200/300/1000 series? Will you be making more videos using Canon printers in the future? I enjoy all your videos. Thanks.
Yes - part of my review process, but remember, my videos are supplemental to my written reviews -) However, my detailed PRO-1000 review was from when it first came out, long before I started the videos. See all my printer stuff at: www.northlight-images.co.uk/photography-articles-and-reviews/printing-paper-reviews-articles/ PS New videos for when a new printer appears ;-)
Great video, again, Keith. I love the Hahnemühle (Hahnemuehle is the correct German equivalent, if you don't know how to type an ü) papers and in their product portfolio, smooth matte and smooth baryta variants. So far my assumption was that all their baryta papers had 0 OBA (Optical Brightening Agents) so this was a surprise to me. To uncurl the paper, I would place a piece of (protection) paper over the print's bulging side and next, together, would roll them, protective paper down, over the edge of a table. With all those test prints for calibration purposes, you have an excellent stock of paper to test how hard you must roll the paper over the edge of your table in order to straighten it.
Considering that paper is a lot heavier & thicker than the much lighter & thinner Epson EPL, you need to make sure to get the printer's paper thickness setting readjusted for that Hahnemuhle before printing.
No - actually you don't on this printer... If I were using it regularly, then yes I would create a custom media setting for it. and do the precision feed adjustments. I may well use this one as an example for custom media on the P5300 ;-)
@KeithCooper Hmmm, interesting. I'd be constantly afraid of head strikes and consequences thereof. What's been your default or at least most used paper thickness setting with the 5300? Can you set it and forget it with this model, or do you have to remember and reset every time you turn it on? And how do you do precision feed adjustments with the 5300?
If the paper had not specified plpp260, my default media setting would have been Baryta. The vacuum system on the P5000 and P5300 is very good - I've never had paper issues on either. Precisions feed - you'll have to do what I'll do... read the manual ;-) :-)
One man's bronzing may be another's "toning" (just as noise can also be generously interpreted as "film grain"). Anyway, I always wonder about which rendering intent to use with Epson Print Layout and wish I had a better idea of which way to go. My most recent prints (P900) were on Hahnemühle Photo Rag Baryta (A3+) and Epson Ultra Premium Luster (UPL--A2) and Perceptual worked very well (in both cases using OEM ICC profiles). Those were both color, but very subtle. I generally use ABW when printing B&W and I've also noticed subtle bronzing/color shift with UPL, but the prints still look good using High Quality mode and as you say, you have to view it off-axis to see it. I've not seen a significant difference going beyond 1440 either. I do have some Hahnemühle Fine Art Baryta 325 but have yet to try it--would you recommend using the Epson UPL or Hahnemühle profile? I always assume that it's best to use the OEM profile, but this becomes a bit more complicated with B&W. I'd know I should experiment more, but I hate to waste paper when you provide such sage advice! I don't suppose you could arrange for me to borrow Kimi's ride for a few laps around Spa... Eau Rouge/Raidillon at speed would be exhilarating (as would keeping the car on track)!
In general, if a paper supplier makes a profile - I'll use it ;-) They also supply .emx files but that needs using the custom media tool Obviously, I also make quite hefty profiles for my own use - I've created 25 so far for the P5300. It would take me all day to get used to the clutch and not stall within the first couple of feet
@@KeithCooper At this point, I'm inclined to continue relying on OEM profiles as I don't have the capacity to create them. Yeah, the g-forces alone would be overwhelming--those guys are as fit as it gets. I only wish the cars were a little more equal (reversing the grid would be interesting), but it's still early...
Thanks for this! Speaking of color gamuts - would you say that the color gamut of this new printer is significantly greater than something with a few years on it - like my old Epson 4880? I'm starting to get monster ink clogs again and am looking at this as a possibility (along with the Canon imagePROGRAF Pro-2600 24" - I know, a different size/class of printer). I haven't really noticed an issue with my 4880 on colors, but with the 5370's addition of violet ink, they're chasing some color differences. Do you see anything different from previous printers?
The P5300 is best compared with the P5000 and 4900 You're losing orange/green and gaining violet. The differences are there, but hardly jump out at you. I have profiles I've made for the same paper for several printers - I need to do some more comparisons for when I write up the main review.
@@KeithCooper My old 4880 didn't have the orange and green - sounds like Epson is going after a different color mix - more for skies, oceans and some flowers that could be out of gamut - than for flesh tones and landscapes. Or maybe the inkset didn't need the extra help in orange and green anymore. Thanks!
Yes, I had a 7880 - the ink set of the P5300 is better than that is quite a few ways. I recall the bronzing on some lustre papers as being quite obvious.
Hi Keith, thanks for the video. About paper. Are there any rules of thumb regarding the types of paper to be used for the subject type being photographed... or is it totally subjective and more a case of suck it and see ?
No 'rules' at all - I mention it in several articles, but only my own preferences So, B&W Cathedrals and old stuff - mostly matte art papers [warmer white]. Landscapes B&W depends on the mood and how dark I want the blacks Colour - bigger prints baryta or lustre - pale delicate colours, bright white rag. Ask me tomorrow and my prefs will change ;-)
Hi Keith, thx again for this interesting video. just checking my thoughts. If I use your test print and the result is completely fine and then print my own photo and it is not completely good. Can you then say that it is due to my photo and/or editing of that photo because the test print was correct?
Thank you for the video, Keith! I have a question about profiling. Using a ColorMunki Photo I made a profile for the natural white art paper (it looks a bit yellowish). Is it OK that now the white patches on my test prints look bluer in comparison to the paper's natural color? I understand that the profile was trying to compensate the yellowness of the paper but is it really the right thing to do? Maybe the spectrophotometer's software had to keep the whites more transparent, making it closer to the paper's color?
One of my quibbles with the ColorMunki and its later versions was that you have very limited control over profiling parameters. When I build profiles in i1Profiler for example, the software may be useless in explaining things, but I do have control over grey/paper neutralisation. It might be worth looking into ArgyllCMS if you want to experiment a bit more - quite a steep learning curve, but very powerful [and free]
@@KeithCooper thank you, Keith! Yes, I know about the Argyll software and was going to try it a few years ago but didn't find an easy tutorial then. Maybe now there are some.
Díky!
Thanks
The Hahnemuhle Fine Art Baryta is good stuff. I have a couple of Magnum 8x10 prints at home and that's the paper they use. A shame its one of the most expensive papers you can buy, but you get what you pay for i suppose.
Yes, a very nice finish
Just got myself a Canon TM-200 (barely used) and finding your videos very helpful. Thanks.
Great to hear - thanks
Hi Keith ,
First off all thank you for all the reviews. They have been a big help getting into the printing of things (again).
I used to work in the graphics industry and we used Epson large format printers to simulate the final printing on press
The question I have is this:
Before actually profiling the printer/paper I had to run a ‘baseline’ test to make sure the printer will function within its operational standards. As far as I can remember it was a simple color scale that had to be measured and in case of a deviation adjust it on the printer.
Can you explain why this is not needed with the printers you’ve tested.
Thanks in advance and greetings from Amsterdam.
Peter
Thanks
What you're doing is calibrating the printer. Modern inkjet printers don't usually drift enough for this to be an issue.
However... I happened to be talking with Epson today, about just this, since they do support calibration for some printers. I was unable to do this in my P5300 review, since the new [free] software ColorBase3 does not support using any spectrophotometer I possess. ColorBase2 works with four different ones I own... It supports the Epson P700 and P900
Why was I wondering about this? Someone asked me about why almost all profiles from a paper supplier printed a touch too magenta. This _might_ be due to their P900 being out of calibration. Now this is very rarely an issue these day, but worth looking at, especially if you are in a colour critical [proofing] situation.
Thanks for that Keith. So it’s possible to calibrate/ lineairize certain printers but hardly ever needed although you can never be sure unless one looks at print using the same lighting conditions and yes, I guess its more important when using a printer for proofing.
Keith, have you performed similar tests using the Canon 200/300/1000 series? Will you be making more videos using Canon printers in the future? I enjoy all your videos. Thanks.
Yes - part of my review process, but remember, my videos are supplemental to my written reviews -)
However, my detailed PRO-1000 review was from when it first came out, long before I started the videos. See all my printer stuff at:
www.northlight-images.co.uk/photography-articles-and-reviews/printing-paper-reviews-articles/
PS New videos for when a new printer appears ;-)
Great video, again, Keith. I love the Hahnemühle (Hahnemuehle is the correct German equivalent, if you don't know how to type an ü) papers and in their product portfolio, smooth matte and smooth baryta variants.
So far my assumption was that all their baryta papers had 0 OBA (Optical Brightening Agents) so this was a surprise to me.
To uncurl the paper, I would place a piece of (protection) paper over the print's bulging side and next, together, would roll them, protective paper down, over the edge of a table.
With all those test prints for calibration purposes, you have an excellent stock of paper to test how hard you must roll the paper over the edge of your table in order to straighten it.
Yes - more experiments for me ;-)
I often use the arm of a sofa rather than a hard edge
Considering that paper is a lot heavier & thicker than the much lighter & thinner Epson EPL, you need to make sure to get the printer's paper thickness setting readjusted for that Hahnemuhle before printing.
No - actually you don't on this printer...
If I were using it regularly, then yes I would create a custom media setting for it. and do the precision feed adjustments. I may well use this one as an example for custom media on the P5300 ;-)
@KeithCooper Hmmm, interesting. I'd be constantly afraid of head strikes and consequences thereof. What's been your default or at least most used paper thickness setting with the 5300? Can you set it and forget it with this model, or do you have to remember and reset every time you turn it on?
And how do you do precision feed adjustments with the 5300?
If the paper had not specified plpp260, my default media setting would have been Baryta.
The vacuum system on the P5000 and P5300 is very good - I've never had paper issues on either.
Precisions feed - you'll have to do what I'll do... read the manual ;-) :-)
@@KeithCooperGood. Roger that 👍
One man's bronzing may be another's "toning" (just as noise can also be generously interpreted as "film grain"). Anyway, I always wonder about which rendering intent to use with Epson Print Layout and wish I had a better idea of which way to go. My most recent prints (P900) were on Hahnemühle Photo Rag Baryta (A3+) and Epson Ultra Premium Luster (UPL--A2) and Perceptual worked very well (in both cases using OEM ICC profiles). Those were both color, but very subtle. I generally use ABW when printing B&W and I've also noticed subtle bronzing/color shift with UPL, but the prints still look good using High Quality mode and as you say, you have to view it off-axis to see it. I've not seen a significant difference going beyond 1440 either. I do have some Hahnemühle Fine Art Baryta 325 but have yet to try it--would you recommend using the Epson UPL or Hahnemühle profile? I always assume that it's best to use the OEM profile, but this becomes a bit more complicated with B&W. I'd know I should experiment more, but I hate to waste paper when you provide such sage advice!
I don't suppose you could arrange for me to borrow Kimi's ride for a few laps around Spa... Eau Rouge/Raidillon at speed would be exhilarating (as would keeping the car on track)!
In general, if a paper supplier makes a profile - I'll use it ;-)
They also supply .emx files but that needs using the custom media tool
Obviously, I also make quite hefty profiles for my own use - I've created 25 so far for the P5300.
It would take me all day to get used to the clutch and not stall within the first couple of feet
@@KeithCooper At this point, I'm inclined to continue relying on OEM profiles as I don't have the capacity to create them.
Yeah, the g-forces alone would be overwhelming--those guys are as fit as it gets. I only wish the cars were a little more equal (reversing the grid would be interesting), but it's still early...
Thanks for this! Speaking of color gamuts - would you say that the color gamut of this new printer is significantly greater than something with a few years on it - like my old Epson 4880? I'm starting to get monster ink clogs again and am looking at this as a possibility (along with the Canon imagePROGRAF Pro-2600 24" - I know, a different size/class of printer). I haven't really noticed an issue with my 4880 on colors, but with the 5370's addition of violet ink, they're chasing some color differences. Do you see anything different from previous printers?
The P5300 is best compared with the P5000 and 4900 You're losing orange/green and gaining violet.
The differences are there, but hardly jump out at you.
I have profiles I've made for the same paper for several printers - I need to do some more comparisons for when I write up the main review.
@@KeithCooper My old 4880 didn't have the orange and green - sounds like Epson is going after a different color mix - more for skies, oceans and some flowers that could be out of gamut - than for flesh tones and landscapes. Or maybe the inkset didn't need the extra help in orange and green anymore. Thanks!
Yes, I had a 7880 - the ink set of the P5300 is better than that is quite a few ways. I recall the bronzing on some lustre papers as being quite obvious.
Hi Keith, thanks for the video.
About paper.
Are there any rules of thumb regarding the types of paper to be used for the subject type being photographed... or is it totally subjective and more a case of suck it and see ?
No 'rules' at all - I mention it in several articles, but only my own preferences
So, B&W Cathedrals and old stuff - mostly matte art papers [warmer white]. Landscapes B&W depends on the mood and how dark I want the blacks
Colour - bigger prints baryta or lustre - pale delicate colours, bright white rag.
Ask me tomorrow and my prefs will change ;-)
@@KeithCooper Good start. Thank you.
Hi Keith, thx again for this interesting video. just checking my thoughts. If I use your test print and the result is completely fine and then print my own photo and it is not completely good. Can you then say that it is due to my photo and/or editing of that photo because the test print was correct?
Thanks - Yes, that's the whole reason I use test prints to start with. The test print confirms the printer/paper/profile/settings are OK
@@KeithCooper Clear answer, thanks.
Thank you for the video, Keith!
I have a question about profiling. Using a ColorMunki Photo I made a profile for the natural white art paper (it looks a bit yellowish). Is it OK that now the white patches on my test prints look bluer in comparison to the paper's natural color? I understand that the profile was trying to compensate the yellowness of the paper but is it really the right thing to do? Maybe the spectrophotometer's software had to keep the whites more transparent, making it closer to the paper's color?
One of my quibbles with the ColorMunki and its later versions was that you have very limited control over profiling parameters. When I build profiles in i1Profiler for example, the software may be useless in explaining things, but I do have control over grey/paper neutralisation.
It might be worth looking into ArgyllCMS if you want to experiment a bit more - quite a steep learning curve, but very powerful [and free]
@@KeithCooper thank you, Keith! Yes, I know about the Argyll software and was going to try it a few years ago but didn't find an easy tutorial then. Maybe now there are some.