Gripe about photo papers--Why no reverse side imprints?

Conventional wet-processed papers were easy to tell front side/ rear side. With non-plastic-coated papers, the emulsion side was clearly enough different that it could be discerned even under safelights.

When most paper was plastic-coated, manufacturers imprinted the rear side with branding.

Why can't that be done now? Why do I open a package of paper that costs $2.00 a sheet and all they can tell me is that it's packed in the box with the printable side of the paper face up?

Why can't they lightly imprint the back of the paper?

Because then it would cost $2.25 a sheet?

Some papers are quite hard to tell which is the printable side. True about face up in the box. I had marked all 20 sheets with a light X with a pencil on the back corner. Helps.

agedbriar wrote in post #18650562
Because then it would cost $2.25 a sheet?

$2.005 per sheet would be a better guesstimate.

I agree it is pretty silly. It used to be so obvious, even if their wasn't a printed mark there was an easy way to tell.

To tell which side is printable, touch the tip of your finger to your tongue, then press on the paper and lift your finger. If the paper sticks to your finger, that's the printable side.

Hen3Ry wrote in post #18651636
To tell which side is printable, touch the tip of your finger to your tongue, then press on the paper and lift your finger. If the paper sticks to your finger, that's the printable side.

A. Doesn't always work, particularly on art papers...which is when it's most difficult to tell the difference in sides.
B. Likely to create a spot on the print

RDKirk wrote in post #18652846
A. Doesn't always work, particularly on art papers...which is when it's most difficult to tell the difference in sides.
B. Likely to create a spot on the print

Actually my experience is that it works very well with Epson Cold Press Bright. In fact, every time.