Printing on Matte Papers

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

I confess I know very little about printing on matte papers.

I got some as a part of a printer package (Canon PRO-10). I tried printing on them. It even has a gloriously sounding name, containing PRO and PREMIUM in it (Canon Paper Pro Premium Matte). And yet... the end result is god-awful and looks like I spilled a gallon of milk on it. Muddy, muted, no real blacks, no vivid colors.

So, what is it for? What kind of subject? High-key only? Pastel only? Is there any PS/LR trickery to make it look even remotely like a decent print?

[Mark D Segal]

Read my reviews of the Epson Legacy papers and Eight Papers on this website and you'll get a better understanding. Matte is not my cup of tea either for the most part, but it does have its places.

[Del]

Until very recently I only printed on matte paper and canvas.  I've always loved the look and very often the prints were mistaken for paintings. People seemed to love them. Even black and white look looked great.  I expect it there is a learning curve, but for both landscapes and portraits, I like matte very much. For what its worth, I've sold a number of these prints without any effort on my part, just word of mouth from those who saw them and wanted them or who referred their friends.  I don't know that it takes anything more than some experimentation and desire to get a good print.  I do remember some of my early prints being as you describe, but don't remember the solution.  Wish I could be of more assistance.

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

Early in my digital days I printed on matte papers and I found a few images that seemed to look nice on Epson's Velvet Fine Art. But I soon switched to gloss papers, trying to recreate what I used to get on unferrotyped glossy paper in the wet darkroom.

To my mind matte paper is OK for gentle images with no deep blacks. But since I switched to glossy papers I haven't encountered any image that cried out for matte sufficiently for me to want to bother with the expensive Epson black ink switch on my Epson 3800.

[Paul2660]

The most important part is a good profile, especially with Matte Black, you can get very muddy shadows and blacks.  The rendering intent also matters.  I use only Epson, and tend to use the Perceptual intent, as that will give a more details in the shadows.  The relative intent is most often recommended, but for me, it takes my blacks much darker and thus I loose a lot of details.

Papers, I mainly use the Epson Hot Press or Breathing Color's Optica 1.  The later has OBA's but for me not a big deal.  Optica 1 has a very fine surface and allows for excellent details on your print.  I also use the Canon Arches watercolor paper, as it has a amazing texture and also allows for very fine details.

B&W can look very nice on Matte, however I tend to stay with glossy for B&W, as I believe the gamut is much better with a glossy paper, thus deeper and better blacks.  The Epson Advanced B&W driver helps here, and Canon has a similar option as I remember possible even better than Epson's. 

Certain prints will just shine on Matte ink and paper, especially a scene with already muted colors, foggy or similar look.  But you can also get some very striking looking prints too.  Many times I will add a deckle edge to matte prints and float them when mounted, also float the mat as that adds such a great effect.

I have had great success with the Epson/Canson/Breathing color stock profiles, and Breathing color will make a custom profile at no charge for you, (great service).  Just send them the printed target and they will ship you a profile. 

Paul C

[Mark Lindquist]

I confess I know very little about printing on matte papers.

I got some as a part of a printer package (Canon PRO-10). I tried printing on them. It even has a gloriously sounding name, containing PRO and PREMIUM in it (Canon Paper Pro Premium Matte). And yet... the end result is god-awful and looks like I spilled a gallon of milk on it. Muddy, muted, no real blacks, no vivid colors.

So, what is it for? What kind of subject? High-key only? Pastel only? Is there any PS/LR trickery to make it look even remotely like a decent print?

Slobodan - as Paul said, the correct and (excellent) printer profile is critical.  The Matte paper you are using is actually a good paper for  printing on to test outcome of your editing before moving on to something like Hahnemuhl or whatever (perhaps the new Epson papers, etc.)  I use it with my HP Z3200 printers and get exceptional results particularly with the in-printer-created custom ICC profile. I mainly use it for test printing because it's so inexpensive.  I don't get as good results with my Canon Pro 100.  Try as you might, without a custom profile, you won't get anywhere with that paper in that printer, at least not that resembles anything printed on semi-gloss, gloss or luster papers that they also offer.

Gloss and semi-gloss is where the Canon (Pixma Pro) printers shine.

Matte definitely has its' place for printing.  If you do an exceptional abstract that has texture, you could easily print it on matte ( a good matte) on your printer providing you have an excellent custom ICC profile, and you might be more than pleased.  Matte has a way of absorbing the light and reflecting color in subtle ways.

-Mark

[pearlstreet]

I don't know about the Canon printers, I've never used one. The picture I attached was printed on a harman smooth mat paper very similar to Hahnemuhle photo rag with the Epson p800. This is an iphone pic taken in the dark corner where my printer is. I was really pleased with the print (not my iphone photo  I like the Hahnemuhle mentioned above and epson velvet. I haven't used the new legacy papers. You have to soft proof to get good results. I use gloss papers for most prints but some work needs to be on matte.

Sharon

[Mark D Segal]

The most important part is a good profile, especially with Matte Black, you can get very muddy shadows and blacks.  The rendering intent also matters. 
Paul C

I agree a good profile is particularly important - not only for matte paper, but for any paper. I do believe as well that the important keys to getting good results from matte paper, as I mentioned in my recent articles, are (1) to make sure the photo itself is amenable to effective treatment on matte; some photos are, others aren't, and this is a matter of artistic judgment; (2) accept the fact that the look and feel of the photo will differ between a matte and a gloss print, therefore (3) each needs to be processed in a manner that gets the best out of both kinds of media, and the settings will not be the same; in particular, the relationship between "Shadows" and "Black" needs particularly careful attention when printing on matte to avoid the muddies and make eye-catching images that have strength and character.

[Damir]

I confess I know very little about printing on matte papers.

I got some as a part of a printer package (Canon PRO-10). I tried printing on them. It even has a gloriously sounding name, containing PRO and PREMIUM in it (Canon Paper Pro Premium Matte). And yet... the end result is god-awful and looks like I spilled a gallon of milk on it. Muddy, muted, no real blacks, no vivid colors.

90% of my printing is on Matte papers. 90% of my customers chose it when they see test prints. Prints on Matte papers are independent of light direction, no strong reflections from surface, no adjusting of light angle in galleries or viewing angle of viewers. Colors are strong and vivid, and blacks are so deep that you can lost yourself in them.
Printer is HP Z 3100, profiles are made in printer with APS.

I wish I could give you some advice, but I can not - it seems that this is problems of your printer - ink - paper combination.

[Alan Goldhammer]

I do a lot of printing on matte papers and especially those that are textured.  Some local artists tend to prefer the textured matte papers for reproductions (mainly Hahnemuhle William Turner).  As everyone has already noted, good profiles are an absolute necessity and one needs to be particularly careful during the 'digital negative processing' stage to get things right.  Also be cognizant that when one compares the same image on gloss v. matte papers there can be a viewer bias because of the larger gamut of the gloss paper.  This doesn't mean that one print is better than the other, only that they are different because of the physical capabilities of the respective paper.

I've printed my 'Snowmageddon' portfolio on both types of paper and tend to prefer the matte version to the gloss (IGFS or Museo Silver Rag).  If one is doing a lot monochrome work, I think toning is a lot easier to manage on matte papers and looks nicer.  As Damir notes in his post above, some people just like the look of matte. 

[Mark D Segal]

.............blacks are so deep that you can lost yourself in them.

That may be more perception than technical reality. From a technical perspective the blackest Black I've derived from a matte paper is about L*14 (if you've done better please tell me with what paper and send me your profile - honestly, I'd like to see). The blackest Black I've achieved from a gloss/luster paper is L*1. That is a large and noticeable difference when you compare test targets side by side. However, if we look at a well-made matte print on its own the quality of Black can appear to be very good, and in the final analysis it is how the print looks that people will relate to most. As I mentioned above, the secret to matte prints with strength and punch, apart from the profiles, depends heavily on how good one is at envisioning and managing shadows and blacks, or the bottom third of the tone curve, in the printing application.

[David Good]

As I mentioned above, the secret to matte prints with strength and punch, apart from the profiles, depends heavily on how good one is at envisioning and managing shadows and blacks, or the bottom third of the tone curve, in the printing application.

Good advise, and I recall a tip from Jeff Schewe about selecting just the shadows as a mask on a layer set to multiply with reduced opacity.
My current matte papers are Epson Hot Press Natural and Hahne Museum Etching (with my own profiles).

[Mark D Segal]

Good advise, and I recall a tip from Jeff Schewe about selecting just the shadows as a mask on a layer set to multiply with reduced opacity.
My current matte papers are Epson Hot Press Natural and Hahne Museum Etching (with my own profiles).

Hi David, yes, in days gone by before Lightroom and before the recent crop of really good luster/gloss papers, I used Photoshop for most of my image editing and created targeted layer masks with one or another Blend mode, usually however within the Lightening group, which when combined with clipped Curves adjustments could really open-up and improve the apparent shadow rendition in the lower part of the tonal distribution. With the advent of Lightroom and the high quality luster papers I have stopped doing all that for most of my print work. But for those using matte, these techniques with Blend Modes remain very effective.

[Damir]

That may be more perception than technical reality. From a technical perspective the blackest Black I've derived from a matte paper is about L*14 (if you've done better please tell me with what paper and send me your profile - honestly, I'd like to see). The blackest Black I've achieved from a gloss/luster paper is L*1. That is a large and noticeable difference when you compare test targets side by side. However, if we look at a well-made matte print on its own the quality of Black can appear to be very good, and in the final analysis it is how the print looks that people will relate to most. As I mentioned above, the secret to matte prints with strength and punch, apart from the profiles, depends heavily on how good one is at envisioning and managing shadows and blacks, or the bottom third of the tone curve, in the printing application.

It may be perception, but that is important to clients, they don't care about numbers, neither do I. Whenever I talk about D-max or years of fading resistance they do not listen, they just choose what seems most pleasing to them.

Paper is old original version of Matte Litho Realistic, fortunately I had almost 50 rolls in stock when production stops, I am using now last two rolls - and still search for replacement. Blacks loos like they are made from layers of soot, and yet keep subtle details.

[Eric Brody]

I've been printing almost exclusively on matte papers for years, mostly Moab Entrada Natural. I print mostly in black and white, usually use Siver Effex Pro, and the QTR printer driver. I've been told many of my color images of flowers and nature on this paper are "painterly," which I've taken as a compliment. Like many here, I spent many years (over 40) in the black and white darkroom, emulating Ansel with cool selenium toned glossy prints as my goal. Now in the digital era, I find I prefer the matte approach. I agree the blacks may not compare to the excellent glossy papers out there but I like it this way! Slobodan, you should keep at it a bit, try some different papers, use profiles, and see if you like it.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... Slobodan, you should keep at it a bit, try some different papers, use profiles, and see if you like it.

Thanks all on your comments so far.

So, profiles... I understand their importance. Just wondering about the difference: all the canned profiles that came with the printer are absolutely spot-on when it comes to glossy, semi-gloss or luster papers... and yet the one for matte seems not.

Soft-proofing (for matte) in LR is actually spot-on too: it looks as god-awful as the print itself. I suspect that requires further significant massaging of the proof copy, e.g. increasing saturation, contrast, blacks, and shadows? None of which I usually do for other papers.

[Mark D Segal]

Yes, you need to repurpose the settings to the media. Make virtual copies and edit them appropriately for the media you are softproofing.

[Benny Profane]

I've been printing almost exclusively on matte papers for years, mostly Moab Entrada Natural. I print mostly in black and white, usually use Siver Effex Pro, and the QTR printer driver. I've been told many of my color images of flowers and nature on this paper are "painterly," which I've taken as a compliment. Like many here, I spent many years (over 40) in the black and white darkroom, emulating Ansel with cool selenium toned glossy prints as my goal. Now in the digital era, I find I prefer the matte approach. I agree the blacks may not compare to the excellent glossy papers out there but I like it this way! Slobodan, you should keep at it a bit, try some different papers, use profiles, and see if you like it.

I am new at home printing, just got a P800, and ordered a lot of sample packs from various paper manufacturers. Just made a print on the Moab Entrada Natural, and it is very very nice. Works well for yellowy sunset thing from a Tuscany trip a few years ago. Shadows and deep end are fine. Try this paper, and, I guess, keep it warm.

[drmike]

This sounds odd to me. I use a Canon printer, Canon ink and get excellent results using Canon paper with their profiles. These days I use the Studio Pro print software as well and I get pretty much consistent prints Matt or Glossy that way to the extent I proof print on Canon Matt which I bought really cheap a while back at A4 and then print A3+ on non Canon paper but with profiles and using Studio Pro. Maybe I am less demanding?

[David Eichler]

I confess I know very little about printing on matte papers.

I got some as a part of a printer package (Canon PRO-10). I tried printing on them. It even has a gloriously sounding name, containing PRO and PREMIUM in it (Canon Paper Pro Premium Matte). And yet... the end result is god-awful and looks like I spilled a gallon of milk on it. Muddy, muted, no real blacks, no vivid colors.

So, what is it for? What kind of subject? High-key only? Pastel only? Is there any PS/LR trickery to make it look even remotely like a decent print?

One of my instructors at NESOP told us that, with matte paper, you need to print with an iron fist.