Article: Using Silver Rag PaperWith The Epson 2400

Quick Links

Ink     Workflow and Driver Settings     Tone and ABW Settings

Paper Color     Dmax     Resolution     Glare     Surface Texture

Gloss Differential     Handling     The Bottom Line

Introduction

Early in 2006 the Crane paper company surprised the black and white printing community with the announcement of their Museo Silver Rag, a 100% cotton OBA-free paper that has the look and feel of fiber based silver gelatin prints, including the deep blacks that have been lacking in even the best matte papers. Here at last was the missing link. In 2005 Epson's K3 inks and printers arrived and almost overnight eliminated much of the difficulty and complexity of fine art black and white printing. The only thing still unsolved was how to get silver gelatin type blacks without resorting to the plasticky RC looking glossy papers. The "holy grail" was a paper that looked like the air dried fiber based glossy papers (ADFBG) long preferred by fine art darkroom printers. This would finally allow us to create prints indistinguishable from darkroom prints to all but the most painstaking examination. Has this long time desire at last been fulfilled?

Early test reports were very good and the demand for Silver Rag was so strong that Crane could not keep up, especially in cut sheet sizes. Finally by late June most suppliers were able to fill long standing customer orders. In the meantime, two other companies, Innova and Hahnemuhle, announced similar papers. Both of these papers are bright white, OBA-containing alpha-cellulose papers (there is a rumor that Innova is soon to release a warm tone version of their paper). I am not opposed to using a-c or OBA papers, but I do avoid using bright white papers for general purpose work. They are great for certain images, but not for everything, and framing is a challenge because it's hard to find matt board to match.

For these reasons I chose to focus on Silver Rag. I am impressed with the paper so far, and am am very pleased to report that it adapts beautifully to the simple and easy workflow for the Epson 2400 that is described in article #9. In this article I will first show the workflow and printer settings I'm using, and then will describe my experience and impressions so far.

Ink

The main difference between working with Silver Rag (SR) and matte papers is the need to us the Photo Black (PK) ink. Fortunately for 2400 users this is a simple matter of changing the cartridge. I use the Epson K3 inks and have not had any problems with partially used carts sitting for weeks and then being reused. I tried some SR samples back in February, and after a few prints removed the PK cart and put it in the plastic bag and let it sit on the shelf. Now almost five months later I reinserted the PK cart and it works fine. The only downside to swapping the K inks is the cleaning cycle that happens each time. Fortunately it is a short cycle, but I do plan my work in advance to minimize the frequency of the changes.

As readers of my other printing articles know, I am much inclined toward the simpler and less complex workflows. The simple workflow described for the 2400 in article #9 has continued to prove itself in my own printing, and it has brought a large number of positive responses from readers who say that it works well for them. I am very happy to report that this workflow adapts beautifully to Silver Rag paper, with only a change in the paper type setting. Rather than repeat much of that information, I refer new readers to article #9 for the details.

After inserting the PK cart, additional paper types appear in the picklist (this may require turning off and restarting the printer). The three choices that interest us are Premium Glossy, Premium Luster, and Premium Semigloss Photo Papers. I made a print with each setting and found them to be nearly indistinguishable, with the exception that Premium Glossy blocked up the shadows less than the other two (I have since learned that other people have reported the same). So I have settled on Premium Glossy for the paper selection.

My basic workflow when working up a new image is to do all initial proofing on the R200 printer using the Black Only (BO) technique on EEM. This gives excellent WYSIWYG, is very economical in ink and paper costs, and provides a master proof to which all final prints using other inks and papers are matched for contrast and density.

Therefore the remarks that follow are based on the idea of printing an image that has already been worked up and proofed, and now am making a final print on SR. These comments are the results of much experimenting, and more specifically, the making of a dozen different prints, matched and compared to their counterparts made with K3 inks on VFA, Dourian (Photo Rag), Merlin Natural and Condor BW.

The SR prints were in every case a bit too dark and with slightly blocked shadows, so an adjustment curve was always required. The effect is so uniform, however, that I was able to make a single curve that worked unchanged for 2/3 of the images. The others needed only a slight tweak. The good news here is that the same curve can be used as at least a starting point for every image, which greatly speeds up the work. I saved the curve as SR-1 and apply it to every image before making the first trial print. This puts it right in the ballpark every time. Here are the plot points of the curve. Each pair of numbers represents the input/output values for a point:

0/0 - 24/28 - 213/223 - 255/255

Tone And ABW Settings

There is some very good news here. SR is much less touchy about different ABW settings than matte papers. Almost any setting provides a more photographically convincing tone while avoiding looking "colorized" (the effect of looking too obviously pink or green, etc.). With matte papers, many settings look colorized, with just certain settings providing harmonized tones that look "photographic" (it's so hard to describe these effects in words). This makes it much easier to work with (you can still spend lots of time trying different settings, but only because of curiosity or indecisivness).

Like all papers SR has a unique tonal response. For example, it required an ABW setting of 5h,8v to closely match the same image printed on VFA at 2h,8v. It also seems to be less sensitive on the horizontal control than the vertical.

Note: I found it nearly impossible to find an exact color match to a corresponding matte print. There are subtle differences in the way the tones shift along the scale from darks to highlights. I got close, but never exact.

Silver Rag is a warm cream color. It ranks as 5.0 on the relative paper color scale used in the "Great Paper Chase" article. This means that even with a cool ink color, any higher zones in a print will appear warm. I tried a cool tone print and it looked pretty strange. On the other hand, sepia tone looks very nice, some of the best I've seen.

Another consideration is because the SR paper is not very reflective the highlights don't "glow" like they do on many popular matte papers. This is not just because of the lack of OBAs. Some non-OBA matte papers are very bright and produce beautiful highlights (Premier Hot Press is a good example). As a result, I noticed when comparing corresponding prints that some images in which highlights were more important looked better on the matte version. One user described SR as having "dirty whites".

Dmax

Unquestionably, one of SR's main attractions is the deep blacks. They are as good or better than silver gelatin papers. The actual densitometer measurements differ slightly among the various reports, but it's really irrelevant. These are the blacks we've been wanting since the beginning.

However, it is important to point out that blacks are not the only important element in good photographs. Just in my limited work so far, I have seen some images where the blacks dominate that look much better on SR, some where highlights are more important that look better on matte paper, and some that look equally appealing on both, just different.

The rendering of fine detail is noticeably softer on SR. So far this difference has not been of major importance for most of my images. But for one, "Summer Storm, Tampa Bay", it makes a noticeable difference. In this image the crisp swirls in the angry storm clouds are a major contributor to the overall emotional impact, and as much as I like the increased dmax in the blacks, the softening effect of SR on the clouds and some foreground details makes it a less effective print. So it can make a difference and should be considered.

Glare

Sigh. One of the things I have grown to love is the lack of glare when viewing matte prints. These SR prints, in spite of their good qualities, seem like a throwback to ancient times. After spending several days working with SR, I sat down last evening and looked through a boxed set of my "Portfolio Number One", which is printed on VFA. I immediately was aware of a sense of relaxation, both emotionally at not having to constantly be turning and twisting the prints to avoid glare, and also physically in my eyes at not feeling them react as they do whenever glare hits them. I was able to enjoy the viewing experience without the distracting annoyance of reflections, and felt a tangible sense of relief from strain.

The surface texture is pebbly, which I think adds to the glare. It seems as if each tiny bump presents a curved reflective surface to the light. This results in a viewing angle that is narrower than a silver gelatin print (I placed an SR print on an ADFBG print and viewed them together at various angles). The ADFBG print also has glare, but it is not nearly as annoying as the SR glare. Perhaps if the pebbly surface was smoothed these problems would be reduced.

Another issue is that the prints have a tacky feel to them, not at all pleasant like a nice matte paper. So we can add that to the mix. This of course is irrelevant for framed prints, but for boxed portfolio sets that are meant to be handled it makes a difference. So the intended use for a print now takes on a larger role. The issue of how important the tactile feel of a print is has always been an interesting one for me. I place a high value on it because I like boxed portfolios. Perhaps SR's tacky surface will make it a bigger issue.

Being soft, the surface is also easily scratched. It reminds me of a silver print that was fixed without hardener. Perhaps Crane will devise a way to harden the surface.

Some users are quite upset about the amount of gloss differential, the attribute where the high zones which have less ink on the paper have less gloss than the darker zones. This is apparently exaggerated by the K3 inks (which apparently are glossier than the MIS K4 inks which some are using). The ink is glossier than the paper itself. This can be easily seen, as there is very little glare from the white borders

While visible, this differential was not a significant issue in the dozen small prints I have made as of this writing. According to reports from other users, the amount of distraction it presents varies depending on the image, its size, and whether there are prominent contrasting areas close together. Apparently in some cases the differential is quite noticeable. It will be interesting to see how important this issue becomes.

Handling

Some really good news here. First, because the SR coating is not prone to flaking, there is no need for the "flake avoidance procedures" that we must do with matte papers (wiping, brushing, etc). I was surprised at what a big difference this makes in time savings. Second, SR feeds beautifully into the 2400 via the top feeder. There is no need to curve the leading edge and no need to assist the paper with a nudge. For the first time I could stack paper in the top feeder and not worry about it. I actually could tell the printer to make three copies and walk out of the room (and find three copies when I returned). Together, these two differences made a surprisingly big difference on the physical production side of things.

Like any paper, SR has pros and cons. The two major features which people are excited about are the Dmax and the silver gelatin look. The addition of better paper handling and less touchy ABW response adds considerably to the plus column. The pebbly glare, tacky surface, gloss differential and softer resolution are significant negatives.

My own thoughts: Without question I would prefer the SR dmax, and would welcome the better paper handling and ABW response. The glare, soft resolution and tacky surface give me great pause. As for the general look and feel, I have mixed feelings. As much as I have come to accept and appreciate matte paper and have not been hungering for the ADFBG look (as many have), there is an undeniable appeal in seeing a carbon ink print that really has "the look". Yet, there is something lacking in these prints. The matte paper versions have a depth and three-dimensionality, a kind of presence, that is missing in the SR prints. The SR prints look sort of sterile in comparison. Perhaps this is just an attribute of this paper and other or future ones will do better in this regard. This, of course, is immeasurable and surely opinions will vary.

It comes back to the often related (and now somewhat tiresome) statement that inkjet printing is an entirely new artistic medium and has it's own characteristics, and should not be expected to look like something else. True, but now we have these new papers and the choices have suddenly become more difficult.

For now, I love the look of my matte prints, and will continue using them for my personal work. I will also continue to experiment with SR, and may very well use it for some images. This will likely present a problem, though, because it will require switching inks just to see how an image looks on it. I think my printing world just got more complicated.