Review Innova printer papers

[LongLensPhotography]

Disclaimer: the following observations are my personal biased opinion. I use Canon Ipf 6450 pigment based printer.

I finally went through all the A4 test packs, made comparisons within and without and here are is the summary of my findings and recommendations. Green = buy; black = neutral; red = do not buy.

Editions rage
These are all essentially safe picks, great colour latitude and accuracy and good contrast.
IFA 11 - a nice and clean smooth matt paper. Looks very good even for a colourful image; would happily sell to customers.
IFA 22 - slightly textured paper, again very contrasty and colourful reproduction. Shadows appear to be slightly crushed.
IFA 107 - Fabriano Printmaking rag: just excellent
IFA 108 - Fabriano watercolor; more pronounced texture, so will be more suitable for specific images
IFA 69 - Baryta; very good, slightly glossy but not too intrusive.
IFA 45 - 335gsm cotton gloss; OK but baryta is much better. No sheen is visible looking directly but becomes annoying at any other angle.

With a few exceptions the Editions range is significantly better than the rest:

Fine Art range
IFA 04, 05 - very thin and grainy. Get 11.
IFA 12 - OK; 22 is slightly better
IFA 13 - Very good watercolour style paper, more pronounced texture than 108. Will suit specific images
IFA 14 - use 11 instead. Colours were dull and had violet cast
IFA 15 - OK. Cheaper and thinner version of 11? With OBA.
IFA 23 - another watercolour but too thin to be useful. 13 is better
IFA 24, 25 - too thin
IFA 26 - fragile paper, with OBA. Grain is very ugly. Use 12 or 13 instead.
IFA 27 - similar to 13 but with OBA. 13 would be my advice.

Photo Art range
IFA 09 - scratches and degrades. I have example that is full of yellow fibres. With OBA. AVOID.
IFA29 - OK, but my sample had manufacturing or packing defect. May be too fragile.
IFA39 - OK, but with OBA. 11 is better for MATT?
IFA40 - OK
IFA41 - too thin
IFA42 - OK as budget option but really too thin
IFA49 - OK
IFA59 - Cheap plastic grainy lustre look
IFA60 - Resin coated cheap look and cracks / delivered cracked from factory. Too thin
IFA71 - RC Metallic gloss. OK if not damaged!
IFA72 - RC Metallic lustre. Totally pointless paper

In my view this is actually a very straightforward choice. My Top 3 picks were IFA 11, 69 and either 107 or 13.

Maybe at some point I will manage to make some direct comparison with Canson Photograg and baryta papers, and maybe even option from Fotospeed and Permajet.

I haven't included canvas, and really if you want the very best don't waste time and get 100% cotton Canson Pro version right away.

 

[Harlequin565]

Interesting!

My experiences:

(These are all I've tested)
Matt
IFA-26 - Excellent all-rounder
IFA-39 - Feels a bit thin and the colours were weird. Black & white rendition though was very good
IFA-13 - Way too heavily textured for my liking (it is "rough" though). Shadow details were "destroyed" according to my notes!

Non-Matt
IFA-45 - Not terrible, and slow drying. Very dark shadows
IFA-40 - Takes blacks terribly. Has a really ugly sheen to it.
IFA-41 - Feelks very thin. Average paper with better options at that price point
IFA-42 - Really good colour and black & white rendition. Feels thin, but great for the price point. (This is the only Innova paper I use, and I use it for "test" A3 prints)
IFA-69 - Again - very average at the £1/sheet price point.

Compared to other papers, Innova has just 1 paper in my personal top 20. Nothing from Permajet or but I don't think they do themselves any favours by demanding people send off prints to them to get profiles done and provide crap default ones on their difficult to use site.

Fotospeed Plat Lustre is my contact sheet and test print paper 'cos it's cheap and accurately rends my photos, and when I run out of Silver Rag, It'll be Canson's Plat Fibre Rag for "gloss", and Somerset Photo Satin for matt. With the Hahnemuhle Photo Rag metallic for special occasions.

Anyway. My thoughts (even though you didn't ask!)

 

[LongLensPhotography]

Interesting!

My experiences:

(These are all I've tested)
Matt
IFA-26 - Excellent all-rounder
IFA-39 - Feels a bit thin and the colours were weird. Black & white rendition though was very good
IFA-13 - Way too heavily textured for my liking (it is "rough" though). Shadow details were "destroyed" according to my notes!

Non-Matt
IFA-45 - Not terrible, and slow drying. Very dark shadows
IFA-40 - Takes blacks terribly. Has a really ugly sheen to it.
IFA-41 - Feelks very thin. Average paper with better options at that price point
IFA-42 - Really good colour and black & white rendition. Feels thin, but great for the price point. (This is the only Innova paper I use, and I use it for "test" A3 prints)
IFA-69 - Again - very average at the £1/sheet price point.

Compared to other papers, Innova has just 1 paper in my personal top 20. Nothing from Permajet or but I don't think they do themselves any favours by demanding people send off prints to them to get profiles done and provide crap default ones on their difficult to use site.

Fotospeed Plat Lustre is my contact sheet and test print paper 'cos it's cheap and accurately rends my photos, and when I run out of Silver Rag, It'll be Canson's Plat Fibre Rag for "gloss", and Somerset Photo Satin for matt. With the Hahnemuhle Photo Rag metallic for special occasions.

Anyway. My thoughts (even though you didn't ask!)
View attachment 272715

I think we will see a lot of variations between different users. I am rather intrigued you found quite significant difference between Canson platine and Baryta. I can barely tell them apart and can't make my mind up which one would be the go to semi / gloss paper. Both are excellent in my view, and yes slightly better than Innova 69 but also more expensive. I doubt untrained eye could see any difference.

I haven't tested any Hahnemuhle due to excessive price, but I could tell their Metallic paper is truly one of a kind, but on the other hand I much prefer the smoother texture of Canson Rag vs H Photograg (can't comment on colour reproduction). I may need to see Somerset Photo Satin if that is a cheaper and better direct equivalent.

Also to clarify even further - IFA 13 and 27 are watercolour style papers and will only suit water-colour like image. It's a very niche product. If your image needs rich blacks look elsewhere to etching, smooth or this PrintMaking thing (both innova and canson?).

Very surprised about 26.... 12 looked like a much cleaner version of the same without the OBA content, but personally I don't find fine textured papers very appealing. I am looking for either smooth or very pronounced surface.

 

[LongLensPhotography]

Some further thoughts and conclusions:

I was trying to make some comparison between Innova IFA 11 and Canson Rag Photo. I use different images so they are not very scientific, and then loaded up ColorSync and compared the profiles. But to begin with INNOVA is at least 50% cheaper than Canson. Longevity is of course the big unknown here so you have to trust their own claims that both are "archival", etc.

* Innova is a slightly smoother paper and is more pleasing to me. There is not much between them and there was some variation between a 2 sheets of Canson and the swatch pack. Interestingly the thinner Canson 210 and 220 duo were slightly smoother similar to INNOVA.
I will note that I am not keen on microtexture on coated papers; it makes the print look dirty. If I want texture I want it to be quite pronounced but at the same time smooth on micro level, a bit like PrintMaKing.

* Both claim to be OBA free.

* INNOVA has a little bit extra in the blacks, which helps for landscapes. Canson is lower in contrast. This is backed up by ICC profile overlay. Light outline is INNOVA. Note that Canson is hanging "in the air" and Innova goes down all the way to the axis.


Obviously it could be just non-fully optimised default profile, but I don't have any further options here.

Edit: for very contrasty images with lots of shadow detail the lack of 0,0,0 blacks in Canson ICC seems to be an advantage. My balloon image from my portfolio is certainly one, but then mid-tone rich Quirang image behaves totally different. Nothing is straightforward when it comes to printing and media selection and proof printing may be necessary. Well, Baryta is probably a fail safe choice except when you really want matte.

* There appears to be a tiny bit of color gamut difference between them but not very much. Notably Canson may be better for deeper reds and Innova is better in the other parts of the spectrum. However, they are both no match for Baryta's so uber colorful image would be better printed on that one way or another.

* Canson Rag Photo 210 and 220 are very slightly better than 310, except obviously way thinner. Most other Canson FA papers ICC profiles look just the same, except PrintMaKing which is slightly better.

* Both seem to deliver similarly nice prints that don't need color pushing too far. For surface, contrast and price my slight preference has to go to INNOVA; for color - Canson wins. It may likely depend on an actual image which paper performs better.

I briefly looked into other options without trying them out physically.
Hahnemuhle Photorag is out due to nasty texture and OBA content let alone price. Smooth version has even more OBAs. Interestingly Bamboo may be one to investigate further if gritty texture is tolerable, say black and white portraits.
Fotospeed SC 300 should tick all the boxes apart from OBA content, and higher price than innova.
Somerset paper also has OBA.

Why all the fuss about OBA? No 1 longevity and perceived value by certain buyers. No 2. Certain papers I tried with OBA seem to have colour shifts I don't like.

That's where we are with Matt papers right now.

--------

I gave Baryta papers another quick look.

I'm invested in IFA69 roll and it still appears to be a sold paper, with good colour and not too much intrusive reflections and no OBA. Canson Baryta Photographique pretty much matches the spec and differences are very subtle; vs Platine I'm still not sure what the difference is; vs Prestige, I really really dislike that due to horrible gloss.
Hahnemuhle theoretically have worse colour reproduction or crap default ICC profiles and OBA content. Price is through the roof again. It seems like they are charging extra for the name in many cases.
Fotospeed Platinum Baryta looks good, just one of the more expensive ones... All their other Baryta-like papers (legacy gloss and another gloss) are not worth the time IMHO.


I really don't think and end user will note much between Innova, Canson and FS. Longevity is another factor. Either way with pigment inks I doubt there will be problems for a few decades.
Do you get any snobbery expecting only Hahnemuhle despite all the drawbacks I just highlighted? Not sure... I guess if they are willing to pay 2X for it I would give them that.

https://longlensphotography.co.uk/2020/03/30/innova-inkjet-papers-review-and-comparison/