Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Photo Rag® Pearl 320 ? Anyone yet ?  (Read 3078 times)
Christopher
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 944


WWW
« on: March 24, 2007, 01:22:27 AM »
ReplyReply

I just saw that it seems like Photo Rag® Pearl 320 is available now. But I did not here any reviews or comments ? Anyone has it yet and tested it ?

Thanks.
Logged

jschone
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 86


« Reply #1 on: March 24, 2007, 08:32:14 AM »
ReplyReply

Christopher,

I ordered a roll last week. I expect to receive it in the beginning of next week.

Jochem

Quote
I just saw that it seems like Photo Rag® Pearl 320 is available now. But I did not here any reviews or comments ? Anyone has it yet and tested it ?

Thanks.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=108402\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged
abiggs
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 555



WWW
« Reply #2 on: March 24, 2007, 09:34:05 AM »
ReplyReply

It looks like a great paper, but I think they are going to have some support hassles with the 320 weight with the smaller 13" printers like the R2400, R1800, 2200, 1280.
Logged

Andy Biggs
http://www.andybiggs.com
Africa Photo Safaris | Workshops | Fine Art Prints
madmanchan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2110


« Reply #3 on: March 24, 2007, 01:15:57 PM »
ReplyReply

What's wrong with using the rear feeds on those smaller printers? Shouldn't it work fine?
Logged

abiggs
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 555



WWW
« Reply #4 on: March 24, 2007, 01:23:33 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
What's wrong with using the rear feeds on those smaller printers? Shouldn't it work fine?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=108461\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

In theory yes, but I have found that the smaller Epson printers always have a tough time with thicker media, no matter which paper path is used.
Logged

Andy Biggs
http://www.andybiggs.com
Africa Photo Safaris | Workshops | Fine Art Prints
AWeil
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 167


WWW
« Reply #5 on: March 24, 2007, 05:16:25 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
In theory yes, but I have found that the smaller Epson printers always have a tough time with thicker media, no matter which paper path is used.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=108464\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Hahnemühle Fine Art Pearl 285 has a very similar (almost the same) surface and works well with the smaller Epson Printers. I have not used any 320gr papers yet, but a number of different 300gr papers (Mohab Entrada, Arches, Museo Silver Rag, Innova Fiba Gloss) and have never experienced any problems with the top feed of the 1280, the 2200 or the 2400.
Angela
Logged
madmanchan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2110


« Reply #6 on: March 24, 2007, 06:27:13 PM »
ReplyReply

Interesting -- are we talking about jams, misfeeds, skews?

Just curious, 'cause I never had any issues with Hahnemuehle Museum Etching on my old 2200, and that's a pretty heavy paper (350 gsm).
Logged

filip baraka
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 40


WWW
« Reply #7 on: March 24, 2007, 07:15:50 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I just saw that it seems like Photo Rag® Pearl 320 is available now. But I did not here any reviews or comments ? Anyone has it yet and tested it ?

Thanks.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=108402\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Great paper as expected from HM
smoother surface than FAP, i see less bronzing but haven't really tested just subjective
warmer ofcourse, great for BW, for color i found it suitable for warmer photos so in that respect FAP is better allrounder

More over/after the weekend
Logged
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad