remarkable new paper

[DanK]

Some time ago, Andre told me of a new paper from Canson, a very smooth, true baryta matte paper. It's called Baryta Photographique II matte. Canson was offering free samples, so I requested one. Many weeks later, my two free sheets arrived.

This morning, I printed a close-up of a squirrel for my youngest grandchild, who is obsessed with bees, ducks, and squirrels. I printed it on my standard paper for non-critical uses: Moab Exhibition Luster, a very white luster with a moderate E value (the amount of pebbling on the surface). Then I printed on Baryta Photographique II Matte, changing nothing but the ICC. I didn't soft proof to increase contrast or to change anything else related to the difference between coated and matte papers.

The results really startled me. As you would expect, the coated paper looks a little crisper. It also gives the appearance of greater contrast, and it should: the DMax is lower for the matte than for coated papers. However, it's higher than for other matte papers I've tried, and when put side by side, the two prints are more similar in that respect than I have ever seen in a matte paper. The matte is very low in OBAs and is warmer than the Moab, which is part of the perceived difference: the highlights are brighter on the Moab paper. However, the blacks are closer than I have seen on other matte papers.

The matte has one advantage that's more apparent than real: no reflections. That advantage, however, is largely lost if you put it behind plain glass.

I just asked Gemini to search to find out if the free offer is still available. It claims only in UK, Belgium, Germany, France, and Italy.

[Round Tuit]

Some time ago, Andre told me of a new paper from Canson, a very smooth, true baryta matte paper. It's called Baryta Photographique II matte. Canson was offering free samples, so I requested one. Many weeks later, my two free sheets arrived.

This morning, I printed a close-up of a squirrel for my youngest grandchild, who is obsessed with bees, ducks, and squirrels. I printed it on my standard paper for non-critical uses: Moab Exhibition Luster, a very white luster with a moderate E value (the amount of pebbling on the surface). Then I printed on Baryta Photographique II Matte, changing nothing but the ICC. I didn't soft proof to increase contrast or to change anything else related to the difference between coated and matte papers.

The results really startled me. As you would expect, the coated paper looks a little crisper. It also gives the appearance of greater contrast, and it should: the DMax is lower for the matte than for coated papers. However, it's higher than for other matte papers I've tried, and when put side by side, the two prints are more similar in that respect than I have ever seen in a matte paper. The matte is very low in OBAs and is warmer than the Moab, which is part of the perceived difference: the highlights are brighter on the Moab paper. However, the blacks are closer than I have seen on other matte papers.

The matte has one advantage that's more apparent than real: no reflections. That advantage, however, is largely lost if you put it behind plain glass.

I just asked Gemini to search to find out if the free offer is still available. It claims only in UK, Belgium, Germany, France, and Italy.

I am glad that you like the paper. When things settle down, I plan to do a side by side print of this Printer evaluation image on the Canson paper and the Hahnemuhle FineArt Baryta Satin paper which is smooth and low gloss.

[DanK]

I'll be very interested in your results.

My first test leads me to think that this will be my go-to matte paper but that for a lot of my work, I'll still prefer the greater pop given by good coated papers. That said, I no longer have a go-to high-end coated paper, so once I have worked through my stock--if I ever manage to--I'll be searching for one.

[Manfred M]

I had noticed this paper at my local camera store the last time I was there.

I have so much stock of matte paper, it will be years before I run out. Most of my work ends up on baryta papers these days.

Good to see Canson is still innovating.

[Round Tuit]

I have finally had the opportunity to compare the following fine art papers: Canson Baryta Photographique(#1), Canson Baryta II Matt(#2), Canson Rag Photographique II(#3) and Hahnemuhle Fine Art Baryta Satin(4). I printed this image



using the same settings for all four papers except of course for the profile of each which is unique and the paper selection in the driver. My printer is a Canon Pro-100 which is a dye printer.

The papers are very close in colour. Comparing the blank papers, I would rate them from the coolest to the warmest: #1 , #4, #3, #2. Once printed, it is difficult to tell the difference in the highlights.

I used the black and white scales of the photo to objectively evaluate the dynamic range. Under the light conditions in the room, 65k LED with unknown colour rendering index and a very bright room(900 Watts equivalent) I could clearly pick the black square 8 and by looking carefully the square 6 was visible on paper #3. The other papers registered at level 10 and 8 respectively. For the white, all the papers showed the level 253 clearly and 254 dimly.

Paper #1 is the glossiest and therefore has more pop than the other papers with of course #2 being the dullest. #4 is very close to #1 leaving #3 not much better than #2.

The last characteristic that I compared was the texture. #2 is basically smooth and so is #3. #1 has a very fine texture while #$4 has a slightly most pronounced texture than #1. Of all the glossy Hahnemuhle papers, #4 is the smoothest in texture although their Photo Rag Pearl paper is smoother it is also practically mat.

HTH

[DanK]

Interesting and very helpful. These are smaller differences than I expected.

If I am following right, this particular Hahenmuhle is very close to the original Canson Baryta Photographique other than being a tad more textured. If that's right, that makes it an appealing option for me. The main reason I am dissatisfied with the newer Canson Baryta Photographique II is the lack of texture. (On the other hand, it supposedly reflects less from an angle.)

Moving last summer forced me to recognize just how much paper I have stockpiled, so I'm going to have to print quite a bit before I'll be buying more. However, I'll keep this in mind for that time.

BTW, that is the same test image I used to test lots of papers a couple of years ago when Canson stopped production of its original Baryta Photographique. I'm not sure the folder of test prints survived the move, however.

[LenR]

Hi Andre, thanks for sharing your findings. For quite a few years Ilford Gold Fibre Silk was my "go to" paper. When this was discontinued I found that Canson's original Baryta was almost identical. Sadly this too has gone. I have been using Canson's Baryta II but would prefer to see a little more 'tooth"on the paper surface. I also use Ilford Gold Fibre Gloss which is a cotton rag based paper with a textured baryta like coating. Perhaps the Hahnemuhle Baryta Satin would be a viable alternative......

A quick on line search for the Hahnemuhle paper at local photographic retailers has the pricing for 25 sheets of 13x19 at $60/70 more than the Canson product. This may be a deciding factor...........

[DanK]

Len,

Thanks for pointing this out. I just went to B&H to check their prices. I used 25 sheets of 11 x 17 to get prices:

Moab exhibition Luster, my non-archval go-to paper for more casual use: $56.

Canson Baryta Photograpique II: $78, 39% more than the Moab

Hahnemuhle fine art baryta satin: $111, 42% more than the Canson.

I think I may pass after all.

[Round Tuit]

I must admit that I did not consider the price in my evaluation. It would definitely be a consideration if I printed more often than I do. I still have a couple of sheets of the original Canson Baryta Photographique 8.5 x 11 from a box of 25 that I bought 5 years ago. As for the 13 x 19, I print 4 or 5 of those a year. My go to paper for casual use is Canon either glossy or semigloss papers.

I will be ordering a box of 25 Hahnemuhle Photo Rag Baryta A3+ size soon and I expect that it will probably last for the rest of my life.

[DanK]

At this point, I am going to try hard just to use up the huge amount I've accumulated, so at the rate I am printing now, I think it will be a long time before I need to purchase more.