Doug Franklin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Ann,
On Mon, 02 Dec 2002 20:49:59 -0500, Ann Sanfedele wrote:
I haven't tried the 8 x 10 heavier Epson yet.
Well, I've found that the Epson high-quality paper (can't remember the
exact nomenclature) and the Kodak Ultra both worked about the same for
Hi Mark,
On Tue, 03 Dec 2002 08:11:44 -0500, Mark Roberts wrote:
Doug Franklin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, I've found that the Epson high-quality paper (can't remember the
exact nomenclature) and the Kodak Ultra both worked about the same for
me
What printer are you using?
I'm using
I use a lot of HP everyday photo paper matte finish, inkjet 36 lb
bond bond normal. That's what it says on the label.
It works very well in my Epson Stylus Photo 1200 printer. Inexpensive,
too. I buy it in 100 sheet packs. I highly recommend it. It prints
great maps using Delorme Street
Doug Franklin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Perhaps Kodak has improved this paper?
I have to assume that either they improved it, or you and I have
different criteria. :-)
When it comes to glossy photo paper, my criteria may not only be *different*
but might in fact be much *lower* than yours! All
Hi Mark,
On Tue, 03 Dec 2002 12:55:16 -0500, Mark Roberts wrote:
When it comes to glossy photo paper, my criteria may not only be
*different* but might in fact be much *lower* than yours!
Well, I'm not so sure about _that_. I'm a serious computer geek, but a
middling amateur
Semi-off topic -
What say you, guys? Do you mix and match printers and papers with good
results?
I'm doing a calendar in Publisher (yeah, publisher is annoying but it is
what i got and I already
ahve the first 4 months done.) I was using a sample of the hp photo
paper - I can't afford a
new
I have Canon printers Ann,but i have tried other
papers than the Photo Paper Pro that is recommended.
I found Kodak does not work well on them,but the Ilford
does.
I have taken a liking to the Ilford Classic Gloss and
the Classic Pearl.Drying times for the Ilford are
quite a bit longer then
Ann Sanfedele [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Semi-off topic -
What say you, guys? Do you mix and match printers and papers with good
results?
I'm doing a calendar in Publisher (yeah, publisher is annoying but it is
what i got and I already ahve the first 4 months done.) I was using a sample
of the
Message text written by INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
What say you, guys? Do you mix and match printers and papers with good
results?
don't do it. you will get worse results, sometimes much worse. 3rd party
papers are OK if the paper doesn't list a specific vendor. many of the more
expensive 3rd
Hi Ann,
On Mon, 02 Dec 2002 11:37:59 -0500, Ann Sanfedele wrote:
Do you mix and match printers and papers with good results?
It's just like the chemical (wet) darkroom ... you need to test the
specific components yourself. Some will work well together and some
won't. And my definition of
On Mon, 2 Dec 2002 14:17:46 -0800, Bruce Dayton wrote:
Of these the two I strongly recommend against are the Epson 785 and
820. All the rest are ok. They HP's have had the least head clog
problems and least paper jam problems.
HTH. Maybe someone else can chime in with experience.
In the
Hi Ann,
On Mon, 02 Dec 2002 20:49:59 -0500, Ann Sanfedele wrote:
I haven't tried the 8 x 10 heavier Epson yet.
Well, I've found that the Epson high-quality paper (can't remember the
exact nomenclature) and the Kodak Ultra both worked about the same for
me, and better than anything else I
12 matches
Mail list logo
