Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Printers > Ink Jet - Inks, Papers, etc.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old May 31, 2003, 3:58 AM   #11
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 506
Default

Actually the Epson premium glossy has a better archival rating than the canon glossy plus. Epson premium glossy has a rating of 12-15 years and canon pro paper has a rating of up to 25 years.
Gregersonsalvage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 31, 2003, 4:05 AM   #12
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 506
Default

The equal papers to PR-101 would be the Epson premium glossy paper, Konica Premium glossy paper, Red river ultrapro glossy paper. I'd almost tell you HP premium paper but they've only recently come out with this new paper so it needs some testing to come up with a final answer on that one.
Gregersonsalvage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 4, 2003, 6:05 PM   #13
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 133
Default What a fight

:shock: Back in my Epson 640 days i always liked Kodak paper cause i felt it was the closest to real looking photos you can get. On the test pictures i printer on the S820 i liked the Kodak Photo paper i used, it's colors were brighter than on the canon pro paper but a drop of water lifted a circle of ink right off the page. Kodak also looked better than Epson matte but that might have been cause Kodak is glossy and custom print settings kodak recomends. I think like anything it all comes down to personal taste. :lol:
PhotoMenace is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 16, 2003, 4:17 PM   #14
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 4
Default

I've only had my i950 for a month and have only used Canon Photo Pro paper (with much happiness). I am interested in longevity and was distraught to see that one site that evaluates longevity:
http://www.livick.com/method/inkjet/pg2d.htm
gave Canon Photo Paper Pro a rating of only 2 years on a S9000 printer with Canon ink. In contrast Red River Polar Gloss was rated at 8 years and Ilford Galerie Classic Gloss at 12.2 years. The site has just started rating the i950 printer, but they don't have a very good sampling of papers and inks yet.
Another logevity evaluation site is:
http://www.wilhelm-research.com/upcoming_data.html
but so far they have not delivered very many results (they promise to though).
Any other good sources to evaluate the longevity of various printer/paper ink combos?
davel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 17, 2003, 2:05 AM   #15
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 506
Default

Damn by the looks of it I need to get an HP thier inks never fade.

But on the bright side I guess I was selling the right printer all along over the Canon since the Epson beats out the Canon Archival rating on every paper. But then again HP doubles out Epson archival ratings.
Gregersonsalvage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 18, 2003, 8:21 AM   #16
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 5
Default

In his review of the Canon S820, Steve says " I have tested several other papers that deliver prints equal in brilliance and color to Photo Paper Pro, one of the best is Konica QP Photo Gloss and Silk paper. Ritz Camera's BigPrint glossy photo paper is excellent and very economical, the 4 x 6" 30 sheet packs are $6.69 and the 8.5 x 11" 10 sheet packs are $8.99 and right now Ritz has a "Buy 2 get 1 Free" deal going. So far the best matte paper that I've used is Epson's Matte Paper Heavyweight, it's an excellent choice for portrait or other pictures that you don't want printed on glossy media. "

I bought the S820 based on the review, and tried all three papers. I don't know about longevity, but initial results are equivalent across the papers. Now to find a cheaper ink source....
jaz50y is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 28, 2003, 10:32 PM   #17
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 24
Default Have had good results with Red River Paper

I use the S900 (forerunner of the 950) based on a review here in Steves site (thank Steve) and have used Red River paper (Ultra Pro, Polar Gloss, and Polar Matte) and get excellent results. In fact I can't tell any difference between these papers and Canon Photo Paper Pro which I also think is great but over priced. My only issues with Red River would be print life vs. Canon but at the same time, I question Canon's 25 year claim with dye based inks. I only use Canon ink in my printer also. I have tried Kodak and you can forget it.

Bill100
Bill100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 28, 2003, 11:34 PM   #18
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 50
Default

I'm sorry to butt in but I have a question:

Why the fuss about longevity of a paper print??

We work with digital cameras and as such with digital material that can be stored in cd, so if need there is it can be reproduced ad nausean without loss so the longevity is really a non issue imo. :?:

This thread should be about paper that gives the best print results.
Hammerjoe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 29, 2003, 6:10 PM   #19
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 24
Default Print life can matter

Print life can be an issue depending on how much you print. If you print a little, it is not really and issue and you can reproduce easily. If you do heavier volumes of printing than it can be an issue with both time and costs. In any case, no dye-based ink is going to last, they will fade (color shift) over time with some doing it faster than others, there is not stopping it. I would perfer to have to reprint as little as possible. The problem as I see it with the current testing methods is that they are based on prints exposed to light for 12 hours per day (most do it this way) as light is viewd as the chief casue of fading (I know that ozone etc has an effect on open air prints). But most people keep their prints in albums that for the most part are closed up excpt for viewing. Thus the real question is what would be the life of these prints be and for that we don't have many answers. You can do accelrated light testing, you can't do accelrated dark testing.

As far as what paper gives the most vibrant print. That is a subjective thing (beauty is in the eye of the beholder) so I would say that there is no 'best' paper in this regard, but there are some 'bad' papers in this regard.


Bill100
Bill100 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:49 AM.