If it wasn't for the weight difference, I would suspect they are the same paper. Also, the Moab is just slightly more yellow. Thanks for watching and commenting!
That's been my conclusion that the Moab Juniper is so similar to the Hahnemuhle and the cost difference is significant. Your video is excellent and helpful in seeing the side by side comparison.
Thanks for watching. It sounds like we share a passion for quality printing. The Moab Juniper Baryta was a pleasant surprise for me. I'm a hardcore Hahnemühle fan and the Moab baryta compares favorably in my opinion. I just printed a client piece on it and I am very happy with it!
Hi Keith. Here you show how important it is that you use good paper to print your photo. And that you can only print snapshots with a standard printer. For real work you want to sell or hang in a gallery, you have to know what you are doing. And the influence of paper and knowledge of it is very important. Moab Juniper Baryta Rag and Hahnemühle Photo Rag Baryta do not differ much from each other. That last matte paper is a big difference between these two. But still, I think the quality of the matte print looks very good. We must of course remember that we do not see what you see via TH-cam. Greeting from the Netherlands. Antoine.
Printing is the best part of photography, for me. I've used both papers extensively, but now mainly gravitate toward the Juniper. Most of my friends don't really understand the difference in papers until I show them images printed on the Juniper, against something like Canon Pro Luster. The Canon paper isn't bad, but the Juniper just pops and the texture really brings the image to life. The Hahnemühle Photo Rag Baryta is great too, but you can't beat the Juniper for the price, and it comes with zero trade-offs.
Thanks for such an informative video Keith. Some stunning photography there, especially the flowers. The Moab and Hahnemuhle both look incredibly choices whichever one you choose. Hard to see any real difference from what I can determine on the screen. Unfortunately it is difficult to get Moab papers in Australia, so I've never been able to try them. I have been thinking about trying the Arches BFK Rives Pure White 310 but haven't got around to it yet. Anyway, always look forward to your photo's and insights.
Thanks Geoff. I used the Moab Entrada Rag for a while but in addition to the OBAs I could never get the mid tones to print correctly. I found myself needing to adjust every image for printing. As a result I gave up on Moab but the Baryta has resurrected my interest. I haven’t tried the Rives BFK yet .
The detail is really good. Also, the blacks are totally black and deep. I always wrestle with how polarized the histogram should be for black and whites. How much in the middle is correct? I think my eye prefers tat matte finish. the bright white is pretty nice.
I love the blacks and contrast of the barytas but the Arches 88 is also quite extraordinary without glare. Ultimately the question about midtones is a personal preference but in general I think BW images are better with strong blacks and whites and midtones opened up somewhat. Ansel Adams looked for a full range of grays in his zone system and his model is a good place to start.
Did you use custom ICC profiles? I've compared these two papers both with their own custom ICC profiles to my printer, and the difference is even more narrow.
Hello -- yes I know about Piezography but I have never attempted it myself. I am curious about it, but don't know the technical aspects of doing it. There are several print shops in the U.S. that provide the service and the results look great from what I can tell. If you try it, I'd love to know how it works out.
I would not be surprised if the Barytas are identical.
Thanks for showing!
If it wasn't for the weight difference, I would suspect they are the same paper. Also, the Moab is just slightly more yellow. Thanks for watching and commenting!
That's been my conclusion that the Moab Juniper is so similar to the Hahnemuhle and the cost difference is significant. Your video is excellent and helpful in seeing the side by side comparison.
Thanks for watching. It sounds like we share a passion for quality printing. The Moab Juniper Baryta was a pleasant surprise for me. I'm a hardcore Hahnemühle fan and the Moab baryta compares favorably in my opinion. I just printed a client piece on it and I am very happy with it!
Hi Keith.
Here you show how important it is that you use good paper to print your photo.
And that you can only print snapshots with a standard printer.
For real work you want to sell or hang in a gallery, you have to know what you are doing.
And the influence of paper and knowledge of it is very important.
Moab Juniper Baryta Rag and Hahnemühle Photo Rag Baryta do not differ much from each other. That last matte paper is a big difference between these two. But still, I think the quality of the matte print looks very good.
We must of course remember that we do not see what you see via TH-cam.
Greeting from the Netherlands.
Antoine.
Thanks Antoine -- Yes TH-cam and even the impact of the video camera changes a lot -- it's never quite accurate.
Printing is the best part of photography, for me. I've used both papers extensively, but now mainly gravitate toward the Juniper. Most of my friends don't really understand the difference in papers until I show them images printed on the Juniper, against something like Canon Pro Luster. The Canon paper isn't bad, but the Juniper just pops and the texture really brings the image to life. The Hahnemühle Photo Rag Baryta is great too, but you can't beat the Juniper for the price, and it comes with zero trade-offs.
100% agreed the Moab - I like too the neutrality . Thanks Keith for the great video.
Thanks for such an informative video Keith. Some stunning photography there, especially the flowers. The Moab and Hahnemuhle both look incredibly choices whichever one you choose. Hard to see any real difference from what I can determine on the screen. Unfortunately it is difficult to get Moab papers in Australia, so I've never been able to try them. I have been thinking about trying the Arches BFK Rives Pure White 310 but haven't got around to it yet. Anyway, always look forward to your photo's and insights.
Thanks Geoff. I used the Moab Entrada Rag for a while but in addition to the OBAs I could never get the mid tones to print correctly. I found myself needing to adjust every image for printing. As a result I gave up on Moab but the Baryta has resurrected my interest. I haven’t tried the Rives BFK yet .
The detail is really good. Also, the blacks are totally black and deep. I always wrestle with how polarized the histogram should be for black and whites. How much in the middle is correct? I think my eye prefers tat matte finish. the bright white is pretty nice.
I love the blacks and contrast of the barytas but the Arches 88 is also quite extraordinary without glare. Ultimately the question about midtones is a personal preference but in general I think BW images are better with strong blacks and whites and midtones opened up somewhat. Ansel Adams looked for a full range of grays in his zone system and his model is a good place to start.
Great video..... Subscribed
Thanks for the sub!
Did you use custom ICC profiles? I've compared these two papers both with their own custom ICC profiles to my printer, and the difference is even more narrow.
Good to know! I used the manufacturer profiles
Hi Keith, do you use regular OEM inks from Epson? Have you ever heard about Piezography inks too?
Hello -- yes I know about Piezography but I have never attempted it myself. I am curious about it, but don't know the technical aspects of doing it. There are several print shops in the U.S. that provide the service and the results look great from what I can tell. If you try it, I'd love to know how it works out.
@@Keithdotson Hi Keith, would love to make a test print based on the test image you always make, can send it to you if you want!