For the last couple of years, I have primarily been printing on Red River Arctic Polar Gloss, which I like very much.
Recently, based on a recommendation, I have been trying Moab Lasal Exhibition Luster 300, which is also very nice.
I have printed images using both papers, and am interested in the difference. (And, yes, my monitor is calibrated regularly, and I am using custom profiles for each paper.)
The results from both are pleasing, but there is a difference. The Moab Lasal image seems slightly yellower than the Red River Arctic Polar Gloss (which is whiter). You can see the difference in the papers when you look at blank sheets of each. The slightly yellower quality of the Moab paper "bleeds through" (for want of a better description) to the image itself.
I suppose that some of the difference may be attributable to variations in the custom profiles?
To people who know, I am sure that all of this is very obvious. But I would appreciate some hints so that I can better understand this issue.
Thank you very much!
#1. "RE: Aesthetics of different papers?" | In response to Reply # 0kmh Nikonian since 04th May 2008Fri 27-Apr-12 06:48 PM
Your question is very much like the one posed recently on Nikonians: Yet Another Paper Question ...
The difference you see between the two papers may well have to do with the amount of OBA used in them. The Red River paper has a high OBA content. I could not find OBA information for Lasal paper, but for two related papers, the Lasal Photo Luster and Gloss, a look at their relfection spectra in SpectrumViz (pigment-print.com) shows that they have minimal OBA. This observation does not absolutely mean the Exhibition Luster has low OBA content, but it increases the odds.
Be aware that the appearance of a paper with OBA changes when placed behind UV absorbing glass because UV light is converted to blue light by an OBA (making the paper appear brighter); see my note in the abovementioned discussion.
#2. "RE: Aesthetics of different papers?" | In response to Reply # 0quenton8 Nikonian since 11th Apr 2010Fri 27-Apr-12 06:49 PM
You might look at this thread which I started a week or so ago ...
I had been using RR Arctic Polar Gloss too, mainly because of the serious white background -- but there seems to be concern about longevity
#4. "RE: Aesthetics of different papers?" | In response to Reply # 0
Here's a thread I've started some time back. I still use this as reference from time to time