OT: Any point in using glossy photo quality paper if …..

"Beemer" wrote in message

If an inkjet photo will be put behind plain glass is there any visual difference in using matte finish paper than glossy paper?

The glossy paper print is likely to have less dot-gain (bleeding).

"Lorem Ipsum" wrote in message

"Beemer" wrote in message

If an inkjet photo will be put behind plain glass is there any visual difference in using matte finish paper than glossy paper?

The glossy paper print is likely to have less dot-gain (bleeding).

And maybe a slightly larger colour gamut.

—
John
Replace ‘nospam’ with ‘todnet’ when replying.

On 10/5/05 10:57 AM, in article
TJS0f.122387$, "Beemer"
wrote:

If an inkjet photo will be put behind plain glass is there any visual difference in using matte finish paper than glossy paper?
Beemer

Yes, there is a very noticeable visual difference.

"C Wright" wrote in message

On 10/5/05 10:57 AM, in article
TJS0f.122387$, "Beemer"
wrote:

If an inkjet photo will be put behind plain glass is there any visual difference in using matte finish paper than glossy paper?
Beemer

Yes, there is a very noticeable visual difference.

I like the matte for soft portraity type shots, it seems more fragile, needs to be framed (scratch prone) The paper I have is watercolor so it has a slight texture, it seems warmer white. I am using it for my flower shots which are kind of soft, grainy and watery.

It does look different than glossy.
I like the really shiny gloss paper for photos that will be handled as opposed to framed, and when I want a crisper, sharper look for the subject. It seems to have a cooler white.

Beemer wrote:

If an inkjet photo will be put behind plain glass is there any visual difference in using matte finish paper than glossy paper?
Beemer

You’ll get higher DMAX (black density) with glossy papers. But personally I prefer Epson’s matte paper, much more forgiving.

"Beemer" wrote in message
| If an inkjet photo will be put behind plain glass is there any visual | difference in using matte finish paper than glossy paper? |
| Beemer
|
|
|

thanks to all.

Beemer

Hi Beemer,

I was talking with a photographer and he thought the glossy tended to look more like a photograph and matte gave picture a more ‘artistic’ look. Perhaps is true for certain pictures.

There’s another choice – lustre paper – which appears to be in between glossy and matte.

Lately, I’ve been using lustre on my pics and quite satisfied.

Best,

Conrad

"Conrad" wrote in message

Hi Beemer,

I was talking with a photographer and he thought the glossy tended to look more like a photograph and matte gave picture a more ‘artistic’ look. Perhaps is true for certain pictures.

There’s another choice – lustre paper – which appears to be in between glossy and matte.

Lately, I’ve been using lustre on my pics and quite satisfied.
Best,

Conrad

Lustre UGH it’s the only paper I NEVER use, never used it back in the chemistry days either.
It’s flat looking, dull and your image gets all diffused.

"Conrad" wrote in message
| Hi Beemer,
|
| I was talking with a photographer and he thought the glossy tended to | look more like a photograph and matte gave picture a more ‘artistic’ | look. Perhaps is true for certain pictures.
|
| There’s another choice – lustre paper – which appears to be in between | glossy and matte.
|
| Lately, I’ve been using lustre on my pics and quite satisfied. |
| Best,
|
| Conrad
|
Conrad,

It’s nice to have a choice of finishes but my question was asking those with paractical experience of those finishes when underneath standard glass.

Beemer

"KatWoman" wrote in message
|
| "Conrad" wrote in message
| | > Hi Beemer,
| >
| > I was talking with a photographer and he thought the glossy tended to | > look more like a photograph and matte gave picture a more ‘artistic’ | > look. Perhaps is true for certain pictures.
| >
| > There’s another choice – lustre paper – which appears to be in between | > glossy and matte.
| >
| > Lately, I’ve been using lustre on my pics and quite satisfied. | >
| > Best,
| >
| > Conrad
|
| Lustre UGH it’s the only paper I NEVER use, never used it back in the | chemistry days either.
| It’s flat looking, dull and your image gets all diffused. |
|
Katwoman,

Fashion changes! I used to like Ilford silk finish in my darkroom days but when I look at these prints now I don’t like the finish.

Beemer

KatWoman wrote:

"Conrad" wrote in message

Hi Beemer,

I was talking with a photographer and he thought the glossy tended to look more like a photograph and matte gave picture a more ‘artistic’ look. Perhaps is true for certain pictures.

There’s another choice – lustre paper – which appears to be in between glossy and matte.

Lately, I’ve been using lustre on my pics and quite satisfied.
Best,

Conrad

Lustre UGH it’s the only paper I NEVER use, never used it back in the chemistry days either.
It’s flat looking, dull and your image gets all diffused.

I agree.
IMHO, Lustre really sucks….. big time.
However, I was at a photo convention a few months back and lots of printer vendors were using Lustre paper to demo their machines. I would think they would choose the paper that best shows off their machines. So probably lots of people like it, but I am not one of them.

To the original poster. There will still be a slight difference in appearance between Glossy and Matte when placed behind glass. The difference will be even slighter if the glass is non-glare. The absolutely BEST way to see the difference is to test it yourself. Easy, Fast, Cheap ….. Then you KNOW!
Bob Williams

Looks like you said…

If an inkjet photo will be put behind plain glass is there any visual difference in using matte finish paper than glossy paper?

Yes, it is different. And BTW, if it’s appropriate, you can consider non-glare glass for your frame.

Of course, the people doing the looking may not notice unless they are actually "looking for" a difference.

Also I think the paper you are talking about is satin finish. However, a lot depends on the printer’s ability.

On Fri, 07 Oct 2005 07:18:05 GMT, "Beemer" wrote:

"Conrad" wrote in message
| Hi Beemer,
|
| I was talking with a photographer and he thought the glossy tended to | look more like a photograph and matte gave picture a more ‘artistic’ | look. Perhaps is true for certain pictures.
|
| There’s another choice – lustre paper – which appears to be in between | glossy and matte.
|
| Lately, I’ve been using lustre on my pics and quite satisfied. |
| Best,
|
| Conrad
|
Conrad,

It’s nice to have a choice of finishes but my question was asking those with paractical experience of those finishes when underneath standard glass.
Beemer

Hi Petey,

I throughly agree on glare-reducing glass. Not perfect, but it sure improves viewing in many situations. A few bucks more – but certainly worth it.

Best,

Conrad

"Conrad" wrote in message
| Hi Petey,
|
| I throughly agree on glare-reducing glass. Not perfect, but it sure | improves viewing in many situations. A few bucks more – but certainly | worth it.
|
| Best,
|
| Conrad
|

I assume that this would change my original question? Anti-glare glass being more like matt paper so in this case it would not make sense to use glossy paper, or would it?

Beemer

Looks like you said…

I assume that this would change my original question? Anti-glare glass being more like matt paper so in this case it would not make sense to use glossy paper, or would it?

No. The anti-glare glass simply allows you to see the print as it is, preventing the glare of light on the glass from distorting and/or blocking the viewers visual access to the print. The gloss paper looks glossier and the matte paper looks mattier, simply put.

Example: Are you familiar with the properties of a polarizing lens filter? Or polarized sunglasses?

Look at a pond on a sunny (or more so on a "glarey") day. Your eyes tell you it’s all blue, but it’s not. The reflected light comes to your eyes much brighter and "whiter" (so to speak), but you still think it’s all blue. Your brain tricks you into seeing only blue, because that’s what you expect to see, but the camera (we won’t get into film vs. digital here) sees what is really there.

Now hold a polarizing filter in front of your eye and you will see far more color as you turn the filter and polarize the reflected light. You will also see into the water itself much better.

Eyes and cameras do NOT see objects. They see only the light that is reflected from the object being viewed.

So non-glare picture frame glass stops the reflected light from the room lights from bouncing back at your eyes. It "absorbs" the reflected glare so your eyes see through the glass much more clearly.

Go to

http://www.worldstart.com/tips/tips.php/139

for some good lessons on polarized light.