Yahoo Groups archive

Digital BW, The Print

Index last updated: 2026-04-28 22:56 UTC

Thread

Re: [Digital BW] ESFA In a 3000

Re: [Digital BW] ESFA In a 3000

2002-11-20 by Peter Marquis-Kyle

Thomas Keesling wrote:
> Mark wrote:
>
> <<The actual thickness of those papers you mentioned can be a bit
> misleading....I've never fully understood how papers get rated...>>
>
> I'm baffled, too, and wish there were a better way to categorize
> them. I suppose the ideal would be to have both the weight and the
> caliper readily available on all papers.

Might we need to specify another parameter? Call it 'stiffness'
perhaps?

I can imagine two papers with the same weight and thickness -- one of
them stiff, and the other one limp.

Peter Marquis-Kyle

Re: [Digital BW] ESFA In a 3000

2002-11-20 by Ernst Dinkla

----- Original Message -----
Show quoted textHide quoted text
From: "Thomas Keesling" <tom.keesling@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2002 2:34 AM
Subject: [Digital BW] ESFA In a 3000


> Mark wrote:
>
> <<The actual thickness of those papers you mentioned can be a bit
> misleading....I've never fully understood how papers get rated...>>
>
> I'm baffled, too, and wish there were a better way to categorize them. I
> suppose the ideal would be to have both the weight and the caliper readily
> available on all papers.

The best way is still "grams per square meter". Paper manufacturers then add
in Dutch "opdikkend" what roughly translates to "thickened" when the paper
gets more volume at the same weigth. And even that doesn't cover all the
tactile differences between papers. A stronger sized paper will show more
rigidity, a hot pressed paper will be more flexible. Any offset printers
paper catalogue will have those specs added,
it is unlikely that that will happen with inkjet papers soon.

Ernst

Move to quarantaine

This moves the raw source file on disk only. The archive index is not changed automatically, so you still need to run a manual refresh afterward.