Good question…I stock 13x19 and make 8x 12s on those. RR must be the only maker of the 9x13–no? I’ve dabbled with RR but go back to Hahnemeule or Epson. Still poking around though.
RR is the only 9x13 I've run across... Canson (and others also offer 11x17 or 1/2 17x22) which is a bit "strange" but as I mentioned I know where that came from traditionally, not that we cannot cut to whatever we'd prefer...
I was always frustrated by the jump in paper sizes from 8x10 to 13x19. I like my work presented in a portfolio box format and the 9x13 print dry mounted to a 12x16 is perfect for my printing. I have been using this size for almost two years evolving from 11x14 size paper which is also rare. I use the Red River Palo Duro Softgloss Rag paper for all my printing which is black and white.
Hopefully, you’ll test the RR Palo Duro Baryta which you’ll find is warmer, more textured surface, fewer OBA’s, etc. The Big Bend produces a bit more saturated appearing prints and surprising is a bit more linear than than the PDB. Nonetheless, I find PDB a more interesting paper.
I do plan on putting together a easy to use summary of our findings so that other users of baryta papers know which way to go based on their current well-known paper. I'll add this as a note. I don't recall the weight of the PDB but if it's close to the Palo Duro and more surface texture that would seem to put it right about where Juniper is.
When you say "more linear" I assume you mean that in terms of some rendering of shadow/highlight separation as compared to mid-tones?? Correct?
Linear in terms of color response (RGB). The Palo Duro Baryta is warmer, a bit more textured, and has fewer OBA’s compared to the Big Bend. I’ve mounted it directly on Sintra and gator board and have left it un coated. The surface is surprisingly resilient and relatively attractive.
Thank you for the clarification. We make a lot of prints that are open to the environment when mounted - in other words without glass. Most of them are matte so Les sprays them with Desert Spray, the only one we've tested that is TOTALLY invisible on matte papers, zero loss of DMAX, no cloudiness, etc. We've tried it on semi-gloss and gloss and basically the glossier the paper, the more surface texture the spray makes (making it like a semi-gloss), it's almost invisible on Juniper but would probably make the smoother surfaced papers look more like Juniper surface wise.
Just in case you mount open prints that ARE NOT too durable ;-)
Don't get me started regarding aspect ratios of popular sensors/film vs aspect ratios of popular/ubiquitous paper sizes. I could rant all day about this and explaining math to people regarding you cannot have "the whole picture" and fill up the paper at the same time, you can only have one.
Maybe I'll write an essay/rant about this someday. Remember WAY back when everyone shot film? Remember when 35mm was somewhat of a specialty and most general consumers shot 110 or 126 or even 120 film before that. The "standard" paper sizes were 8x10, 5x7, and other small sizes that were NOT 3:2 but were either contact print sizes for sheet film or enlargement for 110/126 aspect ratios? Fast forward 35mm became more of the general consumer aspect ratios and we then had ubiquitous 3:2 prints in the form of 4x6 paper? Well, overnight, consumers one way or another when to a 4:3 aspect ratio on digital I guess because most televisions and monitors were 4:3 but ubiquitous small prints were and still are 4x6.
Conclusion = whatever aspect ratio you are using available sheet papers will NOT ever be the same.
At least I kinda' know were 11x17 comes from historically and at least it makes sense in terms of being a 17x22 cut in half which I also know where that came from. Where the heck did 9x13 come from???
IMHO, it's from the more or less ubiquitous 2:3 ratio of 35mm and DSLR sensor ratio. It allows for an 8x12 print with 1/2" order all around for mounting, mat, signature.
Thanks for this report - I'd been waiting for it. Recently I have been using Red River's 88 lb. Baryta Polar Matte in card configuration but have also used it for framed prints. I don't know how to translate pounds into GSM, so can't help there. If you do, I'd like to know the GSM value. At any rate, it's a a thicker baryta matte paper, perhaps a bit smoother than some others. Red River, incidentally, does sell many of its papers in the 11 x 14 size if others are interested. As to the 13 x 19 issue the only thing I can muster in its history is to say that early "large" format printers' maximum paper size was 13 x 19 and some of the printer manufacturers sold papers in that size to go with their printers. Then the 11 x 17 printers came out. I wonder if those were the go-between from the big floor-standing printers of 24 inch width and larger. Others, I'm sure, will explain (and know) much more.
I'm sure that there are online lb to gsm converters out there but I've found that the weights of paper are good relative guides but when they are close in weight (ie, 305 290 310 etc) the only way to really asses them in terms of thickness/stiffness/feel is in person. A good example for the papers we looked at are the Hahnemuhle and the Canson. Even though they are the heaviest papers of the bunch the Hahnemuhle feels stiffer which gives it a feel of being heavier. Similarly the Juniper is on the "lighter" side of these papers at 305 but is also a stiff paper giving it a heavier feel.
Also the 13x19 isn't a strange size but you may have misread... the size I found strange was the 9x13, as in remove the 1 from the front of the 19.
I make 8x12 prints often.
Do you use the 9x13 paper size often?
Good question…I stock 13x19 and make 8x 12s on those. RR must be the only maker of the 9x13–no? I’ve dabbled with RR but go back to Hahnemeule or Epson. Still poking around though.
RR is the only 9x13 I've run across... Canson (and others also offer 11x17 or 1/2 17x22) which is a bit "strange" but as I mentioned I know where that came from traditionally, not that we cannot cut to whatever we'd prefer...
I was always frustrated by the jump in paper sizes from 8x10 to 13x19. I like my work presented in a portfolio box format and the 9x13 print dry mounted to a 12x16 is perfect for my printing. I have been using this size for almost two years evolving from 11x14 size paper which is also rare. I use the Red River Palo Duro Softgloss Rag paper for all my printing which is black and white.
Hopefully, you’ll test the RR Palo Duro Baryta which you’ll find is warmer, more textured surface, fewer OBA’s, etc. The Big Bend produces a bit more saturated appearing prints and surprising is a bit more linear than than the PDB. Nonetheless, I find PDB a more interesting paper.
Thanks AR,
I do plan on putting together a easy to use summary of our findings so that other users of baryta papers know which way to go based on their current well-known paper. I'll add this as a note. I don't recall the weight of the PDB but if it's close to the Palo Duro and more surface texture that would seem to put it right about where Juniper is.
When you say "more linear" I assume you mean that in terms of some rendering of shadow/highlight separation as compared to mid-tones?? Correct?
RB
Linear in terms of color response (RGB). The Palo Duro Baryta is warmer, a bit more textured, and has fewer OBA’s compared to the Big Bend. I’ve mounted it directly on Sintra and gator board and have left it un coated. The surface is surprisingly resilient and relatively attractive.
Thank you for the clarification. We make a lot of prints that are open to the environment when mounted - in other words without glass. Most of them are matte so Les sprays them with Desert Spray, the only one we've tested that is TOTALLY invisible on matte papers, zero loss of DMAX, no cloudiness, etc. We've tried it on semi-gloss and gloss and basically the glossier the paper, the more surface texture the spray makes (making it like a semi-gloss), it's almost invisible on Juniper but would probably make the smoother surfaced papers look more like Juniper surface wise.
Just in case you mount open prints that ARE NOT too durable ;-)
Regarding this strange papier size it looks like almost half of A3+ size papier (13"*19"). I have never seen such papier before.
Neither have I... key word is "almost"... very strange.
Why is 11 x 14 paper no longer available... I called several paper companies and they said, 'well, there's 11 x 17!'
Seems like a waste of paper..etc
Don't get me started regarding aspect ratios of popular sensors/film vs aspect ratios of popular/ubiquitous paper sizes. I could rant all day about this and explaining math to people regarding you cannot have "the whole picture" and fill up the paper at the same time, you can only have one.
Maybe I'll write an essay/rant about this someday. Remember WAY back when everyone shot film? Remember when 35mm was somewhat of a specialty and most general consumers shot 110 or 126 or even 120 film before that. The "standard" paper sizes were 8x10, 5x7, and other small sizes that were NOT 3:2 but were either contact print sizes for sheet film or enlargement for 110/126 aspect ratios? Fast forward 35mm became more of the general consumer aspect ratios and we then had ubiquitous 3:2 prints in the form of 4x6 paper? Well, overnight, consumers one way or another when to a 4:3 aspect ratio on digital I guess because most televisions and monitors were 4:3 but ubiquitous small prints were and still are 4x6.
Conclusion = whatever aspect ratio you are using available sheet papers will NOT ever be the same.
At least I kinda' know were 11x17 comes from historically and at least it makes sense in terms of being a 17x22 cut in half which I also know where that came from. Where the heck did 9x13 come from???
IMHO, it's from the more or less ubiquitous 2:3 ratio of 35mm and DSLR sensor ratio. It allows for an 8x12 print with 1/2" order all around for mounting, mat, signature.
9x13 is for the native format with a 1 inch border for an 8x12 photo.
Thank you!
Thanks for this report - I'd been waiting for it. Recently I have been using Red River's 88 lb. Baryta Polar Matte in card configuration but have also used it for framed prints. I don't know how to translate pounds into GSM, so can't help there. If you do, I'd like to know the GSM value. At any rate, it's a a thicker baryta matte paper, perhaps a bit smoother than some others. Red River, incidentally, does sell many of its papers in the 11 x 14 size if others are interested. As to the 13 x 19 issue the only thing I can muster in its history is to say that early "large" format printers' maximum paper size was 13 x 19 and some of the printer manufacturers sold papers in that size to go with their printers. Then the 11 x 17 printers came out. I wonder if those were the go-between from the big floor-standing printers of 24 inch width and larger. Others, I'm sure, will explain (and know) much more.
I'm sure that there are online lb to gsm converters out there but I've found that the weights of paper are good relative guides but when they are close in weight (ie, 305 290 310 etc) the only way to really asses them in terms of thickness/stiffness/feel is in person. A good example for the papers we looked at are the Hahnemuhle and the Canson. Even though they are the heaviest papers of the bunch the Hahnemuhle feels stiffer which gives it a feel of being heavier. Similarly the Juniper is on the "lighter" side of these papers at 305 but is also a stiff paper giving it a heavier feel.
Also the 13x19 isn't a strange size but you may have misread... the size I found strange was the 9x13, as in remove the 1 from the front of the 19.
I did misread - sorry.
paper weight - pounds to GSM conversion - https://soloprinting.com/resources/paper-weight-conversions/
Thank you!