Luminous Landscape Forum

Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Printing: Printers, Papers and Inks => Topic started by: Christopher on March 24, 2007, 02:22:27 am

Title: Photo Rag® Pearl 320 ? Anyone yet ?
Post by: Christopher on March 24, 2007, 02:22:27 am

I just saw that it seems like Photo Rag® Pearl 320 is available now. But I did not here any reviews or comments ? Anyone has it yet and tested it ?

Thanks.

Title: Photo Rag® Pearl 320 ? Anyone yet ?
Post by: jschone on March 24, 2007, 09:32:14 am

Christopher,

I ordered a roll last week. I expect to receive it in the beginning of next week.

Jochem

Quote

I just saw that it seems like Photo Rag® Pearl 320 is available now. But I did not here any reviews or comments ? Anyone has it yet and tested it ?

Thanks.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=108402\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Title: Photo Rag® Pearl 320 ? Anyone yet ?
Post by: abiggs on March 24, 2007, 10:34:05 am

It looks like a great paper, but I think they are going to have some support hassles with the 320 weight with the smaller 13" printers like the R2400, R1800, 2200, 1280.

Title: Photo Rag® Pearl 320 ? Anyone yet ?
Post by: madmanchan on March 24, 2007, 02:15:57 pm

What's wrong with using the rear feeds on those smaller printers? Shouldn't it work fine?

Title: Photo Rag® Pearl 320 ? Anyone yet ?
Post by: abiggs on March 24, 2007, 02:23:33 pm

Quote

What's wrong with using the rear feeds on those smaller printers? Shouldn't it work fine?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=108461\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

In theory yes, but I have found that the smaller Epson printers always have a tough time with thicker media, no matter which paper path is used.

Title: Photo Rag® Pearl 320 ? Anyone yet ?
Post by: AWeil on March 24, 2007, 06:16:25 pm

Quote

In theory yes, but I have found that the smaller Epson printers always have a tough time with thicker media, no matter which paper path is used.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=108464\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Hahnemühle Fine Art Pearl 285 has a very similar (almost the same) surface and works well with the smaller Epson Printers. I have not used any 320gr papers yet, but a number of different 300gr papers (Mohab Entrada, Arches, Museo Silver Rag, Innova Fiba Gloss) and have never experienced any problems with the top feed of the 1280, the 2200 or the 2400.
Angela

Title: Photo Rag® Pearl 320 ? Anyone yet ?
Post by: madmanchan on March 24, 2007, 07:27:13 pm

Interesting -- are we talking about jams, misfeeds, skews?

Just curious, 'cause I never had any issues with Hahnemuehle Museum Etching on my old 2200, and that's a pretty heavy paper (350 gsm).

Title: Photo Rag® Pearl 320 ? Anyone yet ?
Post by: filip baraka on March 24, 2007, 08:15:50 pm

Quote

I just saw that it seems like Photo Rag® Pearl 320 is available now. But I did not here any reviews or comments ? Anyone has it yet and tested it ?

Thanks.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=108402\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Great paper as expected from HM
smoother surface than FAP, i see less bronzing but haven't really tested just subjective
warmer ofcourse, great for BW, for color i found it suitable for warmer photos so in that respect FAP is better allrounder

More over/after the weekend