Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Your most used and favorite papers ?  (Read 12737 times)
Christopher
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 944


WWW
« on: January 16, 2007, 01:58:41 PM »
ReplyReply

Now what papers are you really using. I would love to get a large overiew.

Perhaps we could state it like this.

Printer:
Glossy/Pearl:
Matt:
Canvas:
One other:

Thanks a lot.
Logged

mikeseb
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 482



WWW
« Reply #1 on: January 16, 2007, 02:20:45 PM »
ReplyReply

Printer: Epson 4000
Glossy/Pearl: Red River Ultra Pro Satin
Matte: Arches Infinity Smooth (when I can afford it); otherwise Moab Entrada, any kind
Canvas: N/A
One other: Moab Kayenta Photo Matte: "everyday" and proofing for Entrada

Still trying to decide between Innova FibaPrint F type glossy, Hahnemuhle Fine Art Pearl, and Crane Museo Silver Rag for a "photo paper" like paper; leaning towards CMSR.
Logged

michael sebastian
Website  |  Blog
jjlphoto
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 467


« Reply #2 on: January 16, 2007, 02:25:12 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Still trying to decide between Innova FibaPrint F type glossy, Hahnemuhle Fine Art Pearl, and Crane Museo Silver Rag for a "photo paper" like paper; leaning towards CMSR.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=96020\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I tested the Innova and Crane on my 3800, and went with the Innova. The surface on the Crane was overly textured, like lustre, almost annoying. The surface of the Innova has just the right amount of stippling. I have a friend who is a tradutional B&W darkroom guy, and he went to Photokina and raved about the Innova he saw there. I showed him my tests, and he also felt the Innova was the hands down winner.
« Last Edit: January 16, 2007, 02:25:33 PM by jjlphoto » Logged

Thanks, John Luke

Member-ASMP
Kirk Gittings
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1547


WWW
« Reply #3 on: January 16, 2007, 03:23:59 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I tested the Innova and Crane on my 3800, and went with the Innova. The surface on the Crane was overly textured, like lustre, almost annoying. The surface of the Innova has just the right amount of stippling.

Once you get them under glass, the texture will all but disappear (unless it is lit at too radical of an angle). So then the papers strenghts and weakness shift to issues gamut and dmax. How do those papers compare in that regard?
Logged

Thanks,
Kirk

Kirk Gittings
Architecture and Landscape Photography
WWW.GITTINGSPHOTO.COM

LIGHT+SPACE+STRUCTURE (blog)
Gordon Buck
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 409



WWW
« Reply #4 on: January 16, 2007, 04:00:08 PM »
ReplyReply

Printer: Epson 2200
Glossy/Pearl: Epson Luster, Moab Kokopelli
Matte: Moab Entrada Natural
Canvas: N/A
Proofing:  Epson Enhanced Matte
One other: Innova FibaPrint F

If I were to count the number of prints, I'm sure that the Epson Enhanced Matte would far outnumber the others.

(Virtually all prints for my personal use; most prints on 8-1/2 x 11 paper, otherwise 13x19 paper, almost nothing smaller than 5x7)
Logged

Dale_Cotton
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 580


WWW
« Reply #5 on: January 16, 2007, 04:05:39 PM »
ReplyReply

Printer: Epson 4000

Matte:
- Epson Watercolor Radiant White
- Epson Enhanced Matte
- Moab Entrada Natural

Photo:
- Premier Art Premium Photo

Not sure how relevant my response is since the majority of my prints are more like watercolours than photos.

Premier Premium Photo is an excellent Epson Premium Luster clone. Possibly a bit shy in the saturated yellows.

I can't see any ink-handling difference between Entrada Natural and HahnemŁhle German Etching and very little difference between their colour or texture.

Mike: having never seen or used Arches Smooth, I'm curious what advantage you see it having over Entrada?
Logged
jschone
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 86


« Reply #6 on: January 16, 2007, 04:40:34 PM »
ReplyReply

Printer: Epson 9800 (Imageprint Phatte Black) and Epson 2400
Glossy/Pearl: Epson Premium Luster, Breathing Color Semi-Gloss and Gloss
Matte: Hahnemuhle Photo Rag (bright white and natural version), Breathing Color Elegance Velvet
Canvas: Hahnemuhle Canvas (both glossy and matte version) Breathing Color Chromata White
Other: Hahnemuhle Fine Art Pearl, Breathing Color Pure Silk

Jochem
Logged
Lisa Nikodym
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1702



WWW
« Reply #7 on: January 16, 2007, 04:47:04 PM »
ReplyReply

Printer: just switched from Epson 2200 to Epson 3800
Glossy/Pearl: Ilford Gallerie Smooth Gloss (for both 2200 & 3800)
Matte: Don't use matte anymore (worse blacks than glossy)
Canvas: (none)

Lisa
« Last Edit: January 16, 2007, 04:47:45 PM by nniko » Logged

mbridgers
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 156


« Reply #8 on: January 16, 2007, 05:01:10 PM »
ReplyReply

Printer:  Canon i9900 (I know, I'm a heretic!   )
Paper:  Ilford Classic Pearl.  Perfect match for this printer.  
I don't use any others any more.  


I don't sell prints, but I do give a few away!
Logged
nihil
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 52



WWW
« Reply #9 on: January 16, 2007, 08:04:48 PM »
ReplyReply

Printer: Epson 7800
Glossy/Pearl: Innova F-type Gloss
Matt: None
Canvas: None
One other: Occasionally Ilford Smooth Pearl
Logged

regards,
Erlend MÝrk
Ed Dubois
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 27


« Reply #10 on: January 16, 2007, 09:05:11 PM »
ReplyReply

Printer: iPF5000 (just finished the installation!)
Ilford Smooth Pearl is my current favorite. Other finishes TBA
Logged
D White
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 73

Don White


WWW
« Reply #11 on: January 16, 2007, 10:33:21 PM »
ReplyReply

Printer; Epson 7800

Matte paper only; almost 100% Enhanced Matte

I am not a very exciting guy and have not tried too many other papers. The Enhanced Matte looks great under glass or in a portfolio sleeve and it is cheap stuff.

I have tried a few Hahnemuhle  papers, and with the canned profiles supplied they just looked a bit flat compared to the Enhanced matte. They also buff way too easy. I know it is a "higher quality" paper base but it does not look that way too me.

The Moab Entrada had greater color saturation with a canned profile but at he expense of more contrast with loss of highlight and shadow detail. When I have more time and maybe access to a better profile I would like to experiment with this more. The surface also buffs more than Enhanced Matte but feels better to me than Hahnamuhle.

Can the new "gloss" fiber papers take Matte Black ink?
Logged

Dr D White DDS BSc
marcmccalmont
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1724



« Reply #12 on: January 17, 2007, 01:20:13 AM »
ReplyReply

Printer Canon iPF5000

My overall favorite (color photos are 90% of what I print) is Fuji Pro (Japan) very white, very glossy, great resolution, vibrancy, palpable

My favorites for reproducing art (pencil/pastels etc.) and B&W photos are Hahnemuhle Photo Rag bright white, William Turner, Innova Soft Textured Art

I'm also impressed with Ink Jet Arts Micro Ceramic Gloss plus, Luster and Duo Bright Matte

For reproducing art (oils/acrylics etc) Inkpress Waterproof Canvas Gloss

For a mature/sophisticated  image Innova F Gloss

Marc
Logged

Marc McCalmont
423photography
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 15


« Reply #13 on: January 17, 2007, 01:54:44 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Printer Canon iPF5000

My overall favorite (color photos are 90% of what I print) is Fuji Pro (Japan) very white, very glossy, great resolution, vibrancy, palpable

My favorites for reproducing art (pencil/pastels etc.) and B&W photos are Hahnemuhle Photo Rag bright white, William Turner, Innova Soft Textured Art

I'm also impressed with Ink Jet Arts Micro Ceramic Gloss plus, Luster and Duo Bright Matte

For reproducing art (oils/acrylics etc) Inkpress Waterproof Canvas Gloss

For a mature/sophisticated† image Innova F Gloss

Marc
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=96111\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

For these papers that you've listed did you get ICC Profiles from the paper manufacturer or did you create them or 3rd party?  Iím looking at purchasing the iPF 5000 and have seen 3rd party support to be on the weak side for  this printer (maybe Iím not looking hard enough). Thanks Marc for the input.

Iíll also look into Ilfordís Smooth Pearl since Iíve seen ICC Profile support from themÖ. thanks for the suggestion Ed (may be asking more questions once I get the printer).

K-
« Last Edit: January 17, 2007, 01:56:05 AM by 423photography » Logged
marcmccalmont
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1724



« Reply #14 on: January 17, 2007, 03:39:17 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
For these papers that you've listed did you get ICC Profiles from the paper manufacturer or did you create them or 3rd party?  Iím looking at purchasing the iPF 5000 and have seen 3rd party support to be on the weak side for  this printer (maybe Iím not looking hard enough). Thanks Marc for the input.

Iíll also look into Ilfordís Smooth Pearl since Iíve seen ICC Profile support from themÖ. thanks for the suggestion Ed (may be asking more questions once I get the printer).

K-
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=96119\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

All but the IJA papers I had profiled at Cathy's Profiles ($40) the IJA papers were quite good with their canned profiles but I might have Cathy profile them because they show promise. The IJA papers are much better than the Canon, Epson or Illfords that I tried. I wish Fuji would export their Pro to the states, it is so good I keep coming back to it as my favorite. When I print on anything else my wife says "whatís wrong with the colors?" She is an artist with an incredible eye for color
Marc
Logged

Marc McCalmont
mikeseb
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 482



WWW
« Reply #15 on: January 17, 2007, 07:33:23 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Mike: having never seen or used Arches Smooth, I'm curious what advantage you see it having over Entrada?

Dale, I only used one box of the 17x22, to print an exhibition last year. I just loved the tactile experience of the paper--luxurious, smooth, rich feeling--if this makes any sense. It was pretty bright even without optical brighteners, to my eye as bright as Moab Entrada White (which of course has OB's). Very little discernible surface texture. Good blacks--about as good as any matte paper can be.

I don't have the numbers in front of me on actual brightness ratings so I could be objectively wrong about this. I really like that paper but it's just too dang expensive when there are other papers that do a fine job. (I think it was about $180-200 a box when Entrada was more like $140.)  

Entrada in both weights and both finishes is my standard portfolio/exhibition paper.
Logged

michael sebastian
Website  |  Blog
Dale_Cotton
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 580


WWW
« Reply #16 on: January 17, 2007, 08:55:59 AM »
ReplyReply

Mike wrote:
Quote
I just loved the tactile experience of the paper--luxurious, smooth, rich feeling--if this makes any sense. It was pretty bright even without optical brighteners, to my eye as bright as Moab Entrada White (which of course has OB's). Very little discernible surface texture. Good blacks--about as good as any matte paper can be.
Thanks! ... This sounds like the paper of my dreams. Although, given the price and difficulty of obtaining in Canada, maybe I should withdraw my thanks. ;)
Logged
Bill J
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 35


WWW
« Reply #17 on: January 17, 2007, 11:50:33 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Iíll also look into Ilfordís Smooth Pearl since Iíve seen ICC Profile support from them
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=96119\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Last November I tried the ICC profile that Ilford has for their Smooth Pearl and it was not acceptable. The greens had a bluish day-glo cast. I just checked their website and it's still the same ICC profile, dated 8/25/2006. Anyway, their profiles are for the print driver, not the print plug-in, if that makes any difference to you.
Logged
Bill J
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 35


WWW
« Reply #18 on: January 17, 2007, 12:15:43 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Iíll also look into Ilfordís Smooth Pearl since Iíve seen ICC Profile support from them.[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=96119\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I meant to add that I like the Ilford Gallerie Smooth Pearl, since it seems to minimize gloss differential better than any other semi-gloss I've seen. The IJA Micro Ceramic Luster also seems to show very little gloss differential as well, but I've only seen one iPF5000 test print on it.

Bill
Logged
ricgal
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 139


« Reply #19 on: January 17, 2007, 02:17:26 PM »
ReplyReply

Epson 4000 and 7500
Gloss:  Epson Premium Gloss or DaVinci Fibre Gloss
Lustre:  Ilford smooth Pearl or FujiHunt semigloss
Matt:  Hanhamuhle 308 gsm photorag by the acre with the 7500 for giclee with a bit of William Turner every now and then for the posh clients
proofing: Epson Archival matt

The Da Vinci I found ultimately disappointing with the 4000 after printing a full roll-  i had so many hastles with head strikes i wound up back rolling the entire roll prior to loading and the gamut with K2 was not as good as some
Getting a z3100 (after 8 years with Epson) next week so looking forward to trying a pile of fancy new fangled papers
Logged

www.ricbower.com- Art and Fashion Photography
www.ricbower.co.uk- Wedding Photography
www.ricbowerphotography.co.uk- Commercial Photography
Pages: [1] 2 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad