Inkjet Prints

[BWiley]

Do all inkjet printers print a perfectly smooth surface between low and high contrast areas of the picture?

Even when printing on Kodak Premium Photo Paper (glossy), my HP 970Cse sometimes looks matt where the picture has deep blacks. Compared to the smooth finish of a commercial photo, this makes it a dead giveaway that it came off my printer. Otherwise, the pictures look sharp, bright and very colorful.

I'm considering purchasing a better printer in the $500-$800 range, but only if it prints a smooth, consistent surface. Any ideas?

Thanks in advance,
Bill

[Conk]

Hope to hear an answer on this myself. I have the same problems.

[dn7elson]

BWiley wrote:
Do all inkjet printers print a perfectly smooth surface between low and high contrast areas of the picture?


Did you mean, do ANY?

BWiley wrote:
I'm considering purchasing a better printer in the $500-$800 range, but only if it prints a smooth, consistent surface. Any ideas?

I have an HP 970 and was happy with its photo output (other than the feed roller indents) until I go my Canon s9000. The finish is uniformly glossy across the sheet with much more photo realistic prints than even the HP970....with no feed roller embossing to boot. The s900 is the same print engine, just smaller print capacity (letter size max photo).

[john_houghton]

The problem is not so much the printer as the combination of ink and paper. Epson printers such as the 1290/1280 give very good results with Epson inks and Epson Premium Glossy, with no trace of the "bronzing" effects. But the same printer with some so-called compatible papers will give blacks and/or blues with a metallic sheen. The permutations of printer, ink and paper are endless. Some will work and other won't. It all depends on how the ink penetrates the coated paper surface. In some cases, the ink will sit on top of the paper and give a layered appearance when viewed at oblique angles. All this is quite aside from the problems of accurate colour rendition, but colour managed software and custom printer profiles will usually solve these particular problems.

John

[redbutt]

I just got the Epson Photo 2200. Using that with the new Epson Premium Semi-gloss paper yields results damn near perfect. I haven't tried printing on other gloss/photo paper yet. I did get some LumiJet Tapestry matte paper and was totally disapointed to find out that the ink doesn't dry fast enough so the paper feed rollers just start tracking ink across the print.

[BWiley]

This is great information! I'd hate to spend $600-$800 only to find out that the "bronzing" or layering is simply inherent to inkjet printers. Sounds like the right combination of hardware, ink and paper can produce near photo-quality prints.

Thanks!

[anthony]

My experiments with the HP 932 I had led me to using Epson paper. I wasn't satisfied with the results from the HP paper, nor from any of the 3rd party papers I tried. The Canon S9000 I'm now using, on the other hand, gives me great results using Ilford and Legion paper, as well as Canon's paper.

[Jerry Vanderberg]

Anthony - I use a CanonS900, so it probably has similar printing characteristics to your 9000 (except for maximum paper size), Do you find the Ilford and Legion photoquality papers cheaper than the Canon PhotoPro? Also, have you compared results with Canon ink cartridges vs. the cheaper Rhinotek one?

[dn7elson]

Jerry Vanderberg wrote:
Do you find the Ilford and Legion photoquality papers cheaper than the Canon PhotoPro?

I have had extremely good results with Kodak Premium Photo Heavy Weight paper in my Canon s9000. I have used it with Canon's EasyPhoto Print software and find that it gives substantially equivalent results to the Canon Photo Paper Pro.

The Kodak paper is on sale periodically, often with a buy 2 get 3 promotion too, so I tend to stock up at those times.

I still use the Canon Photo Pro paper for critical photos, as the ink/paper fade is less of a known quantity with the mix of Canon ink and Kodak paper, but I really cannot see it being a substantive issue.

[anthony]

Jerry - I think the cost for the paper is comparable. I like the Ilford Smooth Pearl finish and I really didn't like the look of the Canon matte paper. Their gloss looks great, but I prefer matte prints. I haven't used the Rhinotek ink. I've used the Canon at home and at work I'm using the refillable cartridges from weink.com which I have been pleased with. If you haven't been to the printer forum at dpreview.com (http://dpreview.com/forums/forum.asp?forum=1003) I highly recommend it. They talk a lot about third party inks, as well as color profiles which can be critical to getting the best results with different papers.

[SteveCliff]

I'm currently using a Canon S9000 with Canon Inks and Ilford Galerie paper (Classic Pearl & Classic Gloss). Seems to work exceptionally well for me !

[Leighow]

I have the Epson 880, but I would like archival inks.

Anyway for the past month or so, I have been using Epson's 4 x 6 glossy photos and cranking up the DPI to 1000 for unknown reaasons (ignorance = magic) and printing.

I have been very, very pleased with these small shots which I mount on matte cards that I fold to 5 x 7.

NORE: These sheets allow you to slightly overshoot the final size. Then, to finish, you fold the crimped perimiter and tear. Voila ! Its a done deal and no exacto knife.

HOWIE

[redbutt]

Unless a miracle occurs, you won't be seeing archival inks on the Espon 880.

[kdobson]

What about the Lysonic Archival Inks? Is the 880 just another name for one of their listed printers?

http://www.lyson.com/products/lysonicframe.html

[redbutt]

O.K. Lemme qualify my remarks with the addition of "Epson". You won't see Epson archival inks on the 880. Yes, there are 3rd party companies like Lyson and Lumijet that may make inks for that printer. Although the Lyson page you referenced doesn't have the 880 as a supported printer.

[jballou]

I found a great site for ink http://www.printer-ink-cartridges-refill.com