Digital BW, The Print

Hi W,

First of all, remember the longevity comes from the PLUS versions.

Second, there's still some of the old stock left on store shelves 
(locally here, just recently have they started selling the "new" 
packages. At CompUSA, they had the "old" packages under the counter 
and they gave me 15% off it I wanted them. I bought all they had.)

The Premium Plus are all 11.5 mils think.

The "just" Premium versions are less (I think 10 mil) thick.

I do headshots on the Premium Plus Matte (now "Satin")for a local 
theater. They look great.

I plan on switching to the Epson C86 and MIS carts for the headshots 
and I am looking into the HP 130 for doing color.


Scott



--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, The Wogster 
<wogsterca@y...> wrote:
> scott_now_coming wrote:
> > 
> > W,
> > 
> > The Gloss HP is like a glossy RC print. Too much gloss for my 
taste.
> > 
> > The original HP Premium Plus Matte Photo paper is closer to a 
fiber-
> > based wet print. Now, HP is calling this "Satin", it was never a 
> > matte surface, but whatever one wants to call it, I prefer it.
> > 
> > Sometimes I like a High Gloss finish for a color photograph, but 
> > never a B&W image.
> > 
> 
> Interesting, just visited the HP website for here in Canada, they 
list 
> the following:
> 
> C6590A HP premium plus photo paper matte
> C6590AC HP premium plus photo paper matte
> C6579A  HP premium plus photo paper glossy
> C6579AC HP premium plus photo paper glossy
> 
> One thing they seem to be doing that is irritating though, the 
printer 
> (Deskjet 842C)handles paper up to Index 110lb / 200gsm, and now 
they 
> specify paper as so many mil thickness, so is 10 mil within the 
> capabilites of the printer or not????  According to HP it's listed 
for 
> this particular printers supplies, but according to a conversion 
chart I 
> found online, 10 mil is Index 150lb / 250gsm.
> 
> I wonder about other papers then, like the Kodak Ultima Picture 
paper 
> and Ilford Classic Gallerie papers (240-250gsm)  The Kodak is 
stated as 
> compatable but it's 270gsm.  There is a 180 degree turn inside the 
> printer, so I see why stiffness is an issue. I wonder though, in 
the 
> last 2-3 years have they made photopaper less stiff for a given 
> thickness.  You can bend a fairly thick paper to the same curve, 
> including traditional photo paper, so the question is why the 
relatively 
> low thickness limit?
> 
> W