Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital Cameras (Point and Shoot) > Panasonic / Leica

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Nov 22, 2004, 2:30 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
NickTrop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 2,249
Default

... just tried this paper. Very nice on my Epson. The reason I like it is that photos (allededly, anyway) lasts 100 years without fading. Big issue with inkjets is permanence of the photos. A little more money but if it lives up to its billing it's worth it... However, by the time I find that out, I will be worm food.

PS... if you give this paper a try:

1. You have to change the color profiles for your printer to match the paper, or use Kodak's free software

2. 4X6 paper, is really 4X6.5(?!?) Unfotunately, my printer won't let me print borderless at this size.

Wonder why they did that?
NickTrop is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Dec 20, 2004, 1:56 PM   #2
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 13
Default

I like the results on my cheap HP, but I was wondering which Epson you are using?

Bob
RobertinArabia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 20, 2004, 4:19 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
NickTrop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 2,249
Default

I have a cheap Epson. An R200. Prints nicely though.
NickTrop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2004, 3:01 AM   #4
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 13
Default

Thanks!
RobertinArabia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2004, 1:05 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
NewsyL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Vancouver, BC Canada
Posts: 231
Default

I just printed my Xmas card pictures using that paper on my Canon i960.

I really wasn't expect much due poor results with Kodak paper in the past but bought the Ultima High Gloss ColorLast 4x6 20 pack because Staples had a 2 for 1 sale.

WoW! WoW! and WoW! :O

I was amazed at the clarity and dynamics of the Ultima Colorlast "High Gloss" paper as compared to the Canon Photo Paper PRO. The Canon prints looked hazy. The blacks were blacker than black with the Ultima as compared to the Canon paper.

I used the recommended settings stated in their guide that was in the package.

Two gripes about the Ultima:

1) Fingerprints!!! After almost 24 hours of drying time the Ultima is very sensitive to handling and will show a smudge with the lightest touch. The Canon paper is much more resistant.

2) the paper is actually 4x6.5 NOT 4x6. It is too long to fit in the i960's cartridge with the cover closed. So I left the cover open. But then I had to trim the long end which was just an opportunity for more finger smudges. Maybe they give you the extra 0.5 inch so you can use it to handle the prints.


But the Ultima's clarity and colours are fantastic!
NewsyL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2004, 4:06 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
NickTrop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 2,249
Default

NewsyL wrote:
Quote:
the Ultima's clarity and colours are fantastic!
Thanks for the tip. I might zip over to Staples and see if this isn't a national sale. Apart from the colors, though, I use generic inks (Abacus 24X7) with my Epson. They look tiny a shade off from the OEM... but $30 vs $75 per set, I ain't complaining. The only issue - allegedly, with generics is even if the colors match, "supposedly" the photos don't last.

Using this paper, I would imagine that solves the permanence issue... but then again, who knows fact from fiction (marketing hype) in ink-n-paper land?
NickTrop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 22, 2004, 10:24 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
Charlie46227's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 295
Default

Word of 'clarification'. If you check the methodology used for Kodak's claim of 100 years you will find that they 'cheated' in terms of the 'standard' testing (Wilhelm), so you can't really compare their claims against anothers'. That is not to say that it is bad paper, but rather do NOT expect it to actually be better than the other 'long life' papers of this kind (swellable polymer.)Also, I believe (but not sure) that ANY moisture on it's surface will quicklydamage the print.

Personally, if I wanted to assure 'photo print longevity' I go to Sam's Club and have themprint my digital files to 'traditional' Fujii medium and processing at 18 cents for 4x6. they also do up to 11 x 17 for under $4 (but they send it off rather than doing in-house.)
Charlie46227 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 23, 2004, 7:27 AM   #8
Senior Member
 
NickTrop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 2,249
Default

Charlie46227 wrote:
Quote:
Word of 'clarification'.┬* If you check the methodology used for Kodak's claim of 100 years you will find that they 'cheated' in terms of the 'standard' testing (Wilhelm), so you can't really compare their claims against anothers'.┬*┬* That is not to say that it is bad paper, but rather do NOT expect it to actually be better than the other 'long life' papers of this kind (swellable polymer.)┬*┬*Also, I believe (but not sure) that ANY moisture on it's surface will quickly┬*damage the print.┬* ┬*

Personally, if I wanted to assure 'photo print longevity' I go to Sam's Club and have them┬*print my digital files to 'traditional' Fujii medium and processing┬* at 18 cents for 4x6.┬*┬* they also do up to 11 x 17 for under $4 (but they send it off rather than doing in-house.)┬* ┬*
Good advice and thank you for the clarification. There is so much crap out there about papers and inks it's hard to tell fact from fiction/marketing hype. So - if not 100 years, how long will this paper last? As far as Sam's Club... great price but for me a bit of an inconvenience, plus I have simply found prints to look sharper from my photo inkjet than the local place when compared.
NickTrop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 23, 2004, 8:42 AM   #9
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 51
Default

Yup...we need a deeper look at the issue. I don't think quality paper solves the issue of short life spaninks. There are, however, long lived inks (advertised to last 70 years). The easy assumption is that with good paper and the newer inks you'll end up with a long lasting print. But the newer inks, I believe, are matched up with the newer printers, i.e., to use one 'ya got to have the other.

john
jmgiv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 23, 2004, 11:33 AM   #10
Senior Member
 
NewsyL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Vancouver, BC Canada
Posts: 231
Default

Since my last post I've printed some 5x7's of the my kids with Santa. This was from a shot taken at one of those shopping mall kiosks where they shoot the Santa picture and print for you several sizes on what looks to be a dye-sub, plus you get the original on a CD. The original was a 532x800.

Well..... using the Kodak Ultima Gloss ColorLast and QImage without any printer profiles, just the Kodak method, I was able to get some fantastic prints off my Canon i960. My print is more accurate in color and retains detail. For example... in the dye-sub print, the reds were blown out (over-saturated?)and you couldn't see the folds in Santa's coat over his belly.

My son was wearing a red shirt a tone darker than Santa's jacket, sorta like a light cherry vs the candy apple red of Santa's coat. There is now a clear difference.

Impressive paper.... now if only it did not mark so easy from finger prints.
NewsyL 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 7:20 PM.