Inkjet Papers

[Acorn]

I might be opening up a can of worms, but amongst the non-dedicated photographic inkjet papers are there brands which give a precisely accurate reproduction of colour that, using dedicated inks, match calibrated screen images? I have tended not to use dedicated brands of paper as they seem to be much over-priced and I remain to be convinced otherwise.

I wonder, without the need to grind any axes, if independent tests have been performed that give conclusive evidence that dedicated papers are superior to the non-dedicated?

[Shadowman]

There are so many ways to evaluate papers, different methods of preparing the print, and so many different environments where product is used that it would hard to make that distinction. The experts (ink manufacturers, paper manufacturers) will tell you that it all matters. One the most important criteria is longevity of the print.

[JR1]

I might be opening up a can of worms, but amongst the non-dedicated photographic inkjet papers are there brands which give a precisely accurate reproduction of colour that, using dedicated inks, match calibrated screen images? I have tended not to use dedicated brands of paper as they seem to be much over-priced and I remain to be convinced otherwise.

I wonder, without the need to grind any axes, if independent tests have been performed that give conclusive evidence that dedicated papers are superior to the non-dedicated?

I am a business, I sell my work, and I have NEVER ever used Manufacturers INK or paper.

I use these

http://www.photopaperdirect.com/prod...-100-Free.html

[Manfred M]

Any paper that you can find an icc profile on (i.e. on the supplier's website) for your printer will be fine.

Alternatively, if you have the equipment to create your own printer / ink / paper profile, then anything goes. Some of the higher end tools for monitor profiling also have the ability to profile your printer / paper.

[davidedric]

As Shadowman says, tough call to make. Let's suppose you have a calibrated display that you view in fixed ambient light, that's your starting point. Obviously, if you change the ambient light you will change your perception of the image. Question is, what's the print equivalent? Where and when are you going to look at it? Given the monitor is transmitted rgb, and the print reflected cmyk, I'm not sure it is even theoretically possible to marry them up.

Since you're in the UK, have a look at Permajet

You can buy a test pack of several of their papers, and they will provide a free custom profile for your printer against any of their papers. That way you .can judge for yourself.

Dave

[James G]

Barry, this is a simple question, on your part.... but I'm afraid the answer is anything but.

My personal view, and I must stress 'personal', is that any paper can be profiled and, provided the profiling is done correctly it is possible to generate a good rendition of what you see on the screen.
But,

brands which give a precisely accurate reproduction of colour that, using dedicated inks, match calibrated screen images?

in respect of the above, you would need to be more precise in terms of what you mean by 'accurate reproduction of colour'

You need to consider the characteristics of the paper itself since it is in many ways much more important to the final print.

As an example, I can print an image to a glossy paper with a very white hard finish/substrate, or I can print it to a matte paper which has a soft creamy textured finish/substrate.

In both cases provided a correctly generated ICC profile for the paper/inkset has been generated, the colour reproduction will be consistent and to all intents and purposes 'accurate' .

The two prints will look different however, because the colour, (and texture), of the papers, being different, filters the way the ink colours are perceived.

This is precisely why I choose specific papers to present specific images that I print.

Choosing the wrong paper can be very easy, for example using the matte creamy textured paper for a nature shot of an exotic butterfly with intense iridescent colours is unlikely to be convincing.

It might however be the perfect paper for a misty sunset with muted softer light.

I, like a number of people who have already responded, rarely use manufactures' paper (in my case Epson), mostly because of price.
I do use some other 6 papers regularly, dependent on the subject I'm printing. I would hesitate to recommend any of them to anyone else since I've arrived at the selection, based on my photographic style and prejudices.

Printing is, (imho), as much art as science.

[loosecanon]

Firstly different types and brands of paper do give different results, and in general one seems to pay for quality. That said for a lot of work good quality general inkjet paper is more than satisfactory.
When I started serious digital printing I invested in the gear to produce my own profiles at about £280. For general exhibition work (ie not photographic exhibitions) where display will be a few weeks or so them a generic paper and generic inks produce a very sasisfactory result, an A3 print for £0.40.
Incidently I invested in the spyder print as it only required one print to be made for scanning. Some require a second print based on the first scan to fine tune the profile. The disadvantage with this, in my opinion, is that one must allow drying time before creating the profile, so the second print really extends the profile development time.

[James G]

Barry, an afterthought....

I wonder, without the need to grind any axes, if independent tests have been performed that give conclusive evidence that dedicated papers are superior to the non-dedicated?

Vendors will always promote their products on the basis that the branded inks and papers have been produced to complement each other to generate the best possible image. They only infer that using other inks or papers that they have not specifically endorsed, could cause a problem (eg ink clogging, or inferior/inconsistent colour).

Personally, I use an alternative inkset, and papers that are not endorsed by my printer manufacturer and have never had a problem. There are numerous threads on this forum which have debated this question, and I think its fair to say that provided you set yourself up to generate profiles for your papers there is no issue.

In the short term, if you are still 'experimenting' with printing and want to gain more experience, before trying to profile papers for yourself, I'd suggest you take a look at other inkjet papers that are available, first checking that you can download ICC profiles for your printer from the supplier,(as Manfred advised in his post) .
And since buying paper is a costly business, keep an eye out for sample packs.

[DanK]

To make sure I am not confused, by "dedicated," do you mean the papers and inks sold by the paper manufacturer?

If so, the answer is that there are a great many excellent papers by many manufacturers, and as several people have noted, as long at you can either download an ICC profile or are willing to create one, you can generally use what you want. If you have a dedicated photo printer (that is, a printer dedicated to photo printing, not a multifunction printer) by one of the major manufacturers, you will probably find that most of the major paper vendors will post ICC profiles. I have printed with three Canon printers and have never had to create an ICC profile; I just download them from the vendor's website.

The idea of "accurate" color is a bit hazy, however. An ICC profile will help, but it will only take you so far, and it is not necessarily the case that a photo printed on different papers will look the same, even with correct ICC profiles. One person mentioned the difference between white and more natural papers. You will often find a much bigger differences between papers that have different surfaces, e.g., a coated paper such as a luster will generally have a much larger color gamut than a matte paper.

When I started getting serious about printing, I ordered sampler boxes (I think 2 sheets each a dozen or so papers) from two manufacturers and printed small test prints on different papers, installing the ICCs as needed. It was a really informative process, and it allowed me to pick a handful of papers that I now use as defaults. None of them are Canon's own papers, although I do use a few of them as well.

Re inks: unlike some others, I use only the manufacturer's own. I assume that some of the aftermarket inks are fine, but others don't stand up well in independent tests (e.g., http://wilhelm-research.com/), and I personally decided not to fuss with it.