Premium Luster Photo Paper for P800

[mhaffey]

I recently purchased an Epson P800 printer.  I have previously used an Epson 2200 and usually print on Epson PLPP.  I will want to print longer that 22" so had assumed that I would purchase a roll of 17" PLPP just as I had purchased rolls of 13" PLPP for the 2200.   Much to my surprise PLPP only comes in 16" wide rolls.  I was pretty surprised as there aren't any 16" printers to my knowledge, certainly none from Epson.  Why is it only available in 16" width rolls and, most importantly, how do others who use PLPP deal with this?

Thanks

[hokuahi]

To my knowledge, Epson PLPP roll is only available in the 16" width. That said, the P800 will print anything from 13" to 17" wide and I've had no problem printing to the 16" width PLPP.

[mhaffey]

I am sure that the P800 will print fine on the 16" width PLPP.  I don't like the idea of giving up an inch of width when the reason I got the P800 rather than a P600 was for the extra width so was wondering what the options are.  I also don't understand why Epson makes a  paper in a size that is less than ideal for their own printers.

[hugowolf]

There is nothing special about Epson Lustre. It is a bog standard RC (ie platic coated) paper. There lots and lots of just as good lustre papers around in 17" rolls.

[howardm]

and it has those lame 'watermarks' on the back just to add to it's perceived pedestrian-ness.

[Wayne Fox]

I think after introducing the 4800, Epson found they had a pretty good market for “people” shooters, (portrait/wedding photographers, etc).  8” and 16” rolls are directed toward that market, since the standard print sizes revolve around 8x10 “units”, as well as 16x20 enlargements.

It does seem odd they didn’t also offer a 17” version.  As mentioned there are several good luster alternatives although I’m not sure which sell it in a roll version. Kodak’s inkjet luster is quite good (they created the original luster texture several decades ago, which was copied by inkjet companies to appear similar to chemical photographic prints.)

[namartinnz]

I replaced Epson Lustre with Breathing Color Vibrance Luster. Comes in 17in rolls, has no writing on the back like the Epson and looks exactly the same. Epson's weight is 260g, Vibrance Luster 255. As the guys say, there are plenty of alternatives.

Neal

[jeffreybehr]

I recently purchased an Epson P800 printer.  I have previously used an Epson 2200 and usually print on Epson PLPP.  I will want to print longer that 22" so had assumed that I would purchase a roll of 17" PLPP just as I had purchased rolls of 13" PLPP for the 2200.   Much to my surprise PLPP only comes in 16" wide rolls.  I was pretty surprised as there aren't any 16" printers to my knowledge, certainly none from Epson.  Why is it only available in 16" width rolls and, most importantly, how do others who use PLPP deal with this?

Thanks

m, I too was surprised to find that Epson supplies 16" roll paper for their 17" printers--seems STUPID to me.  BUT...you (and I) are saved by InkJetArt and their Micro Ceramic Luster.
https://www.itsupplies.com/InkJetArt-Micro-Ceramic-Luster-17X100-roll-3inch-CORE

It's available in 25x17" sheets, too. 
https://www.itsupplies.com/InkJetArt-Micro-Ceramic-Luster-17x25-50-shts

(And here's another example of stupid decisions by Epson and Canon--no 25X17" paper!)  I've used lots of both 25" sheets and custom-cut-from-the-roll sizes in my 3880 and will do so in my on-its-way P800 (but with the roll feeder this time for lengths other than 25").  It looks great with Epson's PLPP profile, too.

[hugowolf]

Oh, it isn't stupid. The 16" rolls have very specific purposes. The Epson semimatte is also only available in 16" (and 24", etc). It is deliberate, not stupid. And the semimatte has a unique and better surface that is not available in sheets.

Brian A

[jeffreybehr]

Oh, it isn't stupid. The 16" rolls have very specific purposes. The Epson semimatte is also only available in 16" (and 24", etc). It is deliberate, not stupid. And the semimatte has a unique and better surface that is not available in sheets.

Brian A

OK, 16" paper may be perfect for those of us loving 16X20" prints, but what IS stupid is NOT supplying other paper rolls in 17".

[mhaffey]

I appreciated the information and recommendations for alternative paper sources.  The idea of making 16" rolls for portraiture work makes some sense, but it seems that 17" rolls would have also sufficed and made the paper useful to a broader range of users.  But the thinking of large companies is often very hard to comprehend. 

I will begin looking at alternative papers and move forward with my P800.

Thanks,

Mark

[Wayne Fox]

I appreciated the information and recommendations for alternative paper sources.  The idea of making 16" rolls for portraiture work makes some sense, but it seems that 17" rolls would have also sufficed and made the paper useful to a broader range of users.  But the thinking of large companies is often very hard to comprehend. 

I will begin looking at alternative papers and move forward with my P800.

Thanks,

Mark

I sell more 16” rolls of luster than I do 17” rolls of any other epson surface.

[jeffreybehr]

I sell more 16” rolls of luster than I do 17” rolls of any other epson surface.

That's because Epson doesn't make 17" rolls of luster.   

[Wayne Fox]

That's because Epson doesn't make 17" rolls of luster.   

I know seems hard to believe, but they’re mostly people shooters and they buy 8” and 16” rolls for their 4900’s.  Most of the higher end landscape guys who buy prints or paper from me are using moab, canson, or epson fine art papers or canvas and don’t use luster. (count me as one of those, although I do use Epson semi gloss for face mounting.  But I buy 24 and 44” rolls.)

I also sell a ton of 16x20 c-prints each year ... and I don’t sell any 17” c-prints.  I know we see the photography world from our own perspective, but 16x20’s and 16x24’s are  very popular sizes.

[Jager]

I know seems hard to believe, but they’re mostly people shooters and they buy 8” and 16” rolls for their 4900’s.  Most of the higher end landscape guys who buy prints or paper from me are using moab, canson, or epson fine art papers or canvas and don’t use luster. (count me as one of those, although I do use Epson semi gloss for face mounting.  But I buy 24 and 44” rolls.)

I also sell a ton of 16x20 c-prints each year ... and I don’t sell any 17” c-prints.  I know we see the photography world from our own perspective, but 16x20’s and 16x24’s are  very popular sizes.

Indeed.  Along the same line, I wish I could purchase 16x20 sheets from Epson, Canson, et al, along with the standard 13x19 and 17x22 sizes.  Yes, cutting down a 17x22 works when you're looking to do that - that's what Rotatrims are for - but it certainly would be handy to have sheets already in your target size.

[Dave Gurtcheff]

m, I too was surprised to find that Epson supplies 16" roll paper for their 17" printers--seems STUPID to me.  BUT...you (and I) are saved by InkJetArt and their Micro Ceramic Luster.
https://www.itsupplies.com/InkJetArt-Micro-Ceramic-Luster-17X100-roll-3inch-CORE

It's available in 25x17" sheets, too. 
https://www.itsupplies.com/InkJetArt-Micro-Ceramic-Luster-17x25-50-shts

(And here's another example of stupid decisions by Epson and Canon--no 25X17" paper!)  I've used lots of both 25" sheets and custom-cut-from-the-roll sizes in my 3880 and will do so in my on-its-way P800 (but with the roll feeder this time for lengths other than 25").  It looks great with Epson's PLPP profile, too.

+1 on the 17"x25" Ink Jet Art Ceramic Luster sheets. I prefer to not crop my images, and I make 16"x24" prints which leaves a nice 1/2" boarder all around to use clear mounting strips, before applying a cut over- mat.
Dave in NJ