Moab Moenkopi Washi Paper Review; Unryu and Kozo

When I first saw these papers online I was immediately captivated and wanted to print all kinds of photos using them.  I read some reviews and noticed most people commented on how these papers were “not for every photo”.  I figured that I could make it work though, and that I would soon be printing everything on these papers.

Well, that wasn’t the case, and I’ve come to agree with those reviews that call this a specialty paper.  The Unryu is my favorite because the very obvious and unique texture makes up for the lacking of “technical” quality.  The Kozo, on the other hand, is not that different at first look from a lightly textured matte paper like Canson BFK Rives or Hahnemuhle German Etching.  Yet, it produces much worse results, technically speaking.  I’ll start with the Unryu.

Here is the test image:

Macallen and his Quilt

Here is the initial scan.  It was done with my normal scan settings, and it came out pale, because of how translucent this paper is.  The scanners light was so bright it blasted away the saturation.  This transparent quality gives the paper a nice ethereal look, but it needs a white mat underneath to hold the saturation.

moab moekop unryu

To give you a closer idea to what it looks like in reality, I changed my scanners settings to prevent document see through:

moab moekop unryu2

This one better captures how warm this paper is how the saturation came through.  Be sure to check the full size images to see the texture, it is very, very unique and very strong.  I personally like it a lot if I want the texture to be a feature of the print.  I found that upping the ‘color density’ setting on my Epson 3880 by 10% compliments the paper well, although it doesn’t make the image more ‘accurate’ as shown on screen.  For such a unique paper, it actually is fairly sharp, but I’ll say that it isn’t anywhere near the sharpness of a smooth rag paper, and definitely not as sharp as a baryta or gloss paper.  I actually think this is a great paper if you have one of those ‘dreamy’ photos that is maybe a little out of focus or taken with a softer lens wide open.  Overall I’d say this paper is a winner, but definitely not suitable for frequent use unless your typical subject matter is light, warm and dreamy.

Now for the Kozo.  This one I haven’t yet found a good image for.  I started with this image:

The Quiet of Winter

Which got me this print:

moab moenkop kozo

The print actually looks better in the scan.  It is darker in real life, and it is definitely not sharp.  The colors look mushy.  Granted, the original shot was not super sharp, so I tested this shot, which is very sharp.


Which got another dull mushy print.

moan moenkopi kozo

I haven’t gotten a good image on the Kozo yet.  I’m not sure what type of shot this paper was meant for, but I sure don’t have one in my library.

By all means, definitely give a sample pack of these a try, there isn’t much else out there like it, but I have found that these papers live up to the term specialty.


Hahnumühle William Turner vs Canson Arches Aquarelle

These are two heavily textured fine art papers, one from Hahnemuhle and one from Canson Infinity.  I decided to compare the two using a black and white print.  The textures are pretty different, which you will be able to see in the s scans, so that will definitely be a matter of personal preference, but otherwise, both papers performed similarly.

Here is the test image, taken with a Canon 5D Mark II and Canon 70-200 f4L IS in Kandahar Province, Afghanistan.


First up is the Hahnemuhle Willian Turner.  This is probably my favorite textured paper, especially for color images.  You can read about how it worked with a color image in my paper review post.


Here is the Canson Arches Aquarelle


The William Turner came out a little denser and warmer than the Canson Arches Aquarelle.  I personally prefer the texture of the William Turner because it is less mechanical, however that is partially due to being a wood pulp paper instead of a cotton paper like the Canson.  So, that may influence your decision if longevity is important.  I felt that the William Turner held back the highlights a bit more, which let some of the upper “zone” areas hold better detail and microcontrast than the Arches Aquarelle. The surface of the William Turner was a little more delicate, and I noticed after a bit of handling that tiny “chips” had came off of some of the heavily inked areas, whereas this did not happen with the Arches Aquarelle.  The Hahnemuhle’s dMax appears better here than with the Canson.  The downside to the Hahnemuhle William Turner against the Canson Arches Aquarelle is that the paper is definitely less neutral, which can be important.  Additionally, the William Turner had a little less detail in the deepest shadows, and the texture does every so slightly take away just a tiny bit of sharpness, whereas the Arches Aquarelle texture didn’t hurt the sharpness quite as much.

Personally I like warm toned black and white photos, so I will probably stick with Hahnemuhle William Turner.  I haven’t tried a color image with the Canson Arches Aquarelle, so I will have to give that a try sometime as well.

Thanks for reading!

Hahnemühle Museum Etching vs Canson Montval Aquarelle

I’m not suggesting these papers are direct competitors, but the texture is similar, so I thought it would help to show these papers differences to help others make an educated purchase.

Here is a quick comparison of these two papers using a color image.  I chose this image because it has a very saturated red area, blue area, green area, and a large grey/white area as well.  First things first, here is digital file of the image printed.  It was taken off the coast of Port Denarau, Fiji; with a Canon 5D Mark II, Canon EF 300mm f4L lens and B&W Kaseman MRC circular polarizer:

Oil Tanker

Now for the scans of the prints.  Definitely check out the scans at full size, you can clearly see that the Canson texture is more “patterned” than the Museum Etching.  Not a bad thing in itself, but your personal taste may vary.  I don’t have anything special for a scanner, so I can’t say that your monitor is displaying what the prints exactly look like, but you can tell the differences of the papers relative to one another at least.

Prints were done with a freshly calibrated iMac, on an Epson 3880 using manufacturer recommended settings and ICC profiles

The top print is the Hahnemuhle Museum Etching, the bottom is Canson  Montval Aquarelle



The Hahnemuhle had much warmer greens, which I felt didn’t do the scene justice, but because of this warmth, the shadowy areas of the mountains appeared less flat.  Also, the clouds in the Hahnemuhle were clearly warm.  The Canson had better blue ocean tones, cleaner clouds, and cleaner greens.  The Canson did have a flatter look in the shadowed areas, but overall the print has more pop.  If you look at both scans at full size, the sharpness is a moot point; they are both very sharp for their texture.

In the future I would choose Canson Montval Aquarelle over Hahnemuhle Museum Etching for color landscapes.

4 Canvas Shootout

I was having a hard time deciding on my favorite canvas, so I decided to run a head to head competition on my top 4;

Harman By Hahnemuhle Canvas

Hahnemuhle Daguerre Canvas

Hahnemuhle Monet Canvas

Moab Anasazi Canvas

I printed the below image on all of them, using the company provided profiles and perceptual rendering intent. I chose perceptual because it really helped maintain the transitions in the shadows, something that can get lost because these matte canvases have much less dynamic range than a screen or glossy paper.

2 Months Old!

After running this test I think that Hahnemuhle Monet Canvas is even more clearly the winner. Here is how the test turned out:

Harman By Hahnemuhle Canvas: This one was the coolest toned of the bunch, but maybe a little less bright than the Daguerre. It came off with good shadow detail but the deeper areas were not that deep compared to the Monet. The colors were the least saturated and the skin tones were the coolest. The texture and feel is great and I like the weight, but it didn’t work so well for me as a color portrait canvas, which is, in my opinion, the best use for canvas.

Hahnemuhle Daguerre Canvas: This one wasn’t that different from the Harman. It was slightly whiter, and as such was also a little less saturated compared to the Monet, but not any less saturated than the Harman. The details were great, but again, I didn’t see the skin tones as pleasing, making it less effective as a color portrait canvas, in my opinion.

Moab Anasazi Canvas: Once again the heavy and very mechanical looking texture was prevalent in this canvas. The colors were the most intense, and the skin tones actually came out too saturated, ever so slightly orange compared to the Monet. Not sure I really like this canvas at all.

Hahnemuhle Monet Canvas: Contrary to my initial review, this canvases contrast wasn’t at all because the whites were whiter. It is, in fact, the warmest and least white of all 4 canvases! For some reason though, maybe a great dmax, this canvas just “pops” the best, had the most pleasing natural skin tones, and had a texture that was neither overbearing nor absent, and it held good detail. A definite winner in my opinion, a roll of this canvas will be on the way to my house soon!