If you had to pick one paper!

[Adampro1]

Hi,

Silly question, but I'm curious what people would choose. Money not being an object, what paper would you pick (state your printer as well). (Glossy and matte your preference can be eggshell etc just pick two one being a more gloss and one being somewhat matte.) So what you love, and why

BTW, sorry if someone has created a thread like this, I've only gotten through three pages of paper chat!

Black and White Glossy -
Black and White Matte -
Color Glossy -
Color Matte -
100% cotton 300+gms smooth NON-PHOTO-PAPER -

New to this kind of printing, and just thought I'd see what people like.. Without having used much in way of papers, I'm leaning more towards Hahnemuhle Pearl Photo Rag / Hahnemuhle Fine Art Baryta 325 / Hahnemuhle Photo Rag Ultra Smooth 305 from the reviews I've been reading, I'm itching to try those three, but would love to hear from others what they love and why.


Best!

 

[Roy Sletcher]

Interesting concept.

I cannot work with one type/category/finish style of paper fits all images.

I find that a certain type of image best suits the colour, surface texture, tonal range, contrast etc of a certain paper better than another paper.

It is a highly subjective choice and what I consider to be part of the creative process. Others, including many of my friends, consider it an unnecessary delay and complication. A large number of my friends laugh at my procedures. For them printing is no more than selecting an image and hitting CONTROL-P or uploading an imAge to Costco or Walmart. So sad!

Possibly part of the decline in printing as a creative craft and artistic expression is because so many now consider printing to be a commodity product and are unable to appreciate the subtleties and nuances of an excellent print. Of course if their skill level, with their muli-megapixel camera, is to produce a digital image around 1080 pixels on the long edge, then quality printing can be a challenge

Increasingly I come across photographers who claim they do NOT print, and only produce images for digital display, and who knows, with 4K monitors on the horizon printing may go the way of the dodo bird. Hopefully not, but stranger things have happened.

Apologies! Have wondered off topic so will shut up now. Will leave the post, even though it is more of a rant, and contributes little to the subject. Sorry about that.

RS

 

[fotofreek]

Interesting concept.

I cannot work with one type/category/finish style of paper fits all images.

I find that a certain type of image best suits the colour, surface texture, tonal range, contrast etc of a certain paper better than another paper.

It is a highly subjective choice and what I consider to be part of the creative process. Others, including many of my friends, consider it an unnecessary delay and complication. A large number of my friends laugh at my procedures. For them printing is no more than selecting an image and hitting CONTROL-P or uploading an imAge to Costco or Walmart. So sad!

Possibly part of the decline in printing as a creative craft and artistic expression is because so many now consider printing to be a commodity product and are unable to appreciate the subtleties and nuances of an excellent print. Of course if their skill level, with their muli-megapixel camera, is to produce a digital image around 1080 pixels on the long edge, then quality printing can be a challenge

Increasingly I come across photographers who claim they do NOT print, and only produce images for digital display, and who knows, with 4K monitors on the horizon printing may go the way of the dodo bird. Hopefully not, but stranger things have happened.

Apologies! Have wondered off topic so will shut up now. Will leave the post, even though it is more of a rant, and contributes little to the subject. Sorry about that.

RS

Off topic from the thread, but I'll add my two cents worth. I read an interesting article a few months ago in which the author was lamenting the lack of interest of the current "connected" generation in actually printing a digital image. They take lots of pictures (almost all with smart phones), but these images are consigned to linger in digital-land. I was in Indianapolis for a nephew's high school graduation recently. At a family dinner party I took out a small, pocketable digital camera to take some pictures. My niece, a 23 year old college grad, looked quizically at me and said "I didn't know that anyone still used cameras!"

I have all of my parents' photos, including their negatives. There are pictures of my grandparents and even a few of my great grandparents. To me, this is a treasure trove of memories that is irreplaceable. To those I've added thousands of family pix that I enjoy sorting through, touching, scanning and framing to put on the wall. It is a shame that the personal printed image may someday fade into obscurity.

 

[The Hat]

You get much the same reaction today when you walk instead of driving there..

 

[mikling]

The nuclear explosion of the number of digitally captured images has reduced a captured image into nothing special for the newer generation. In the past, each image was special as it was limited and you put effort into making use of that opportunity. What we see today is everyone taking photos with hardly anyone paying attention to the details of what is being captured and treasuring that one time spot.
Looking at a picture requires more thought and attention...and concentration as to what the image is conveying. It is indeed odd that at a time when we can capture so much, it means so little.
In retrospect, it is to be expected actually. The old supply and demand curve. When there are so many images or pictures or an oversupply, each one is worth so little.

 

[mikling]

On topic, in reality, Roy is spot on. There are so many factors most of them subjective that plays into choosing a paper. Some people choose based on the way it feels despite the image being hung and out of touch. It's very personal. Some also would not put an image on inexpensive paper as it would be like serving a chef's creation on a paper plate. Very open ended.
Maybe the more exotic the paper sounds the more desirable it becomes, don't get me wrong but there is something when one says it is printed on ............................................................ paper. It adds exclusivity and value.

 

[Dan1982]

Good question. Although I don't think I could pick just one but my fav at the moment is Hahnemuhle German Etching

 

[rodbam]

I agree with Roy 100%, the print looks a lot better to me than it does on a high res monitor. Also Mikes point about the posh names the expensive papers have which seem to add exclusivity to the print, even calling it Giclee prints can add $100 to the price because who would buy an inkjet print
I suppose the paper I use most for Pigment inks is Canon Luster & for the first time I bought some Kodak Metallic paper & the prints so far look excellent. I have only printed three shots so far & there's no gimmicky metallic sheen so far but I have probably picked images that they say don't show up the metallicness of the paper, they do have a certain something about them though.

 

[turbguy]

I prefer all my prints on matte photo paper. I really dislike the specular reflections from glossy surfaces, but a luster finish is somewhat more acceptable to my eye. I know that dMax is compromised on most matte papers, but that's my preference...

 

[Lucas28]

Roy is right, there is no 'one size fits all' for paper. Here are the papers I've got at the moment:
Sihl 300 gsm glossy photo paper
Epson premium glossy photo paper
Ilford Galerie smooth gloss photo paper
DR 160 gsm matte waterproof photo paper
Fuji 235 gsm premium plus glossy photo paper A3
Epson 194 gsm photo paper A3+

for documents:
Xerox 75 gsm
Motif 80 gsm A3

My favorite photo paper is Sihl glossy.
For office documents I prefer the 75 gsm paper, which means 6.25 % less trees get killed. I also print most documents double sided for less paper use.