Topic: vibrant paper (Read 19219 times)

marcmccalmont · « **on:** March 07, 2008, 02:57:34 pm »

I was in Honolulu the other day and walked into a Peter Lik gallery. The prints were so vibrant they looked back lit. The sales person said it was due to a proprietary paper developed by Fuji that was Mylar and chrome? Does any one have a clue what this paper is? It was a bit over the top and not "fine art" printing but it was fun and I'd like to play with something like it.
Marc

POAH · « **Reply #1 on:** March 07, 2008, 03:31:37 pm »

its probably a film printing paper/technique rather than inkjet.

marcmccalmont · « **Reply #2 on:** March 07, 2008, 04:07:16 pm »

Quote

its probably a film printing paper/technique rather than inkjet.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=179863\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Do you know of an inkjet paper (iPF5000) that would have the same effect?
Marc

POAH · « **Reply #3 on:** March 07, 2008, 04:29:12 pm »

not got a clue

Ernst Dinkla · « **Reply #4 on:** March 07, 2008, 05:05:44 pm »

Quote

I was in Honolulu the other day and walked into a Peter Lik gallery. The prints were so vibrant they looked back lit. The sales person said it was due to a proprietary paper developed by Fuji that was Mylar and chrome? Does any one have a clue what this paper is? It was a bit over the top and not "fine art" printing but it was fun and I'd like to play with something like it.
Marc
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

It could have been the Pop-Up banner material, PET (Mylar) base of 190 Micron and a near pearl sheen, gray opaque backside. Usable on the pigment wide formats of the three manufacturers. 24" and 36" wide rolls. Cat nr. 989301 989301 No experience with it but it is in the Fuji sample book.

Ernst Dinkla

try: [a href=\"http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/]http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/[/url]

marcmccalmont · « **Reply #5 on:** March 07, 2008, 06:10:30 pm »

Quote

It could have been the Pop-Up banner material, PET (Mylar) base of 190 Micron and a near pearl sheen, gray opaque backside. Usable on the pigment wide formats of the three manufacturers. 24" and 36" wide rolls. Cat nr. 989301 989301 No experience with it but it is in the Fuji sample book.
Ernst Dinkla

try: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=179884\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Thanks
Ill look it up
Marc

DLS · « **Reply #6 on:** March 07, 2008, 08:08:50 pm »

Quote

I was in Honolulu the other day and walked into a Peter Lik gallery. The prints were so vibrant they looked back lit. The sales person said it was due to a proprietary paper developed by Fuji that was Mylar and chrome? Does any one have a clue what this paper is? It was a bit over the top and not "fine art" printing but it was fun and I'd like to play with something like it.
Marc
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=179851\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

It could have been a fuji paper called Metallic Pearl. It has mica particles embedded in it. It has a super glossy finish and the highlights look slightly pearlescent. It's for lightjet type printers only. I sometimes get lab prints on it for certain images with really saturated colors.

marcmccalmont · « **Reply #7 on:** March 08, 2008, 04:37:59 am »

I ordered some inkpress white gloss film to see if it will give me the same effect
Marc

channel_mixer · « **Reply #8 on:** July 09, 2008, 12:39:23 am »

So, did it? I'm curious about this surface.

Nick Rains · « **Reply #9 on:** July 09, 2008, 02:41:11 am »

I'm pretty sure it's Fujiflex, an R41 process so you can get it done anywhere. Peter used to use hand printed and contrast masked Ilfochrome but swapped to Flex a couple of years back.

The backlit effect is simply good gallery display, something at which Peter excels. The paper reflects 12V dichroics very well, put a couple of spots on the print against a dark wall and hey presto - backlit. I had people looking behind the prints in my gallery to see if there was a light there - true I swear.

AFAIK, no magic material, just good images, good printing and good display. I use the same material myself - if you want to try it send some files to Created For Life near Sydney, Australia. Their printing is as good as it gets.

CFL

Nick Rains · « **Reply #10 on:** July 09, 2008, 02:43:28 am »

Oh, one other thing - there is no inkjet process to match Flex. It just cannot be done with ink on paper, no matter now glossy.

Guess what, traditional wet process silver gelatin materials still do some things inkjets cannot!

Alistair · « **Reply #11 on:** July 09, 2008, 05:23:41 am »

Quote

Oh, one other thing - there is no inkjet process to match Flex. It just cannot be done with ink on paper, no matter now glossy.

Guess what, traditional wet process silver gelatin materials still do some things inkjets cannot!
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=206587\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

If you listen to the BBC interview on his web site the printing technique is described in reverent, almost breathless terms. As it transpires his prints are made using special chrystals embedded in the paper. These modern marvels are apparently called silver halide. Anyone heard of it?

Man, this guy is a marketing genius. He is already turning over $20m and is aiming for $50m-$60m.

01af · « **Reply #12 on:** July 09, 2008, 06:29:00 am »

Booksmart Studio is offering coated aluminum sheets for inkjet printing. Don't know how prints on aluminum will look like ... but maybe it's worth a try. Of course, you'll need a printer that has a straight media feeding path.

-- Olaf

Wayne Fox · « **Reply #13 on:** July 09, 2008, 04:01:27 pm »

Quote

I'm pretty sure it's Fujiflex, an R41 process

CFL
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=206586\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

C-41 and RA-4 are the principal processing methods used in chemical processors.

Fujiflex is processed in RA-4 or equivalent chemistry, same as other Fuji and Kodak papers. What makes it unique isn't the emulsion, but the base, which is polymer. This provides its extreme high gloss surface. This surface allows light to reflect much more evenly and thus enhances saturation and d-max.

The mounting of Lik's prints is superb, without adding any texture and maintaing the high gloss. However, as has been mentioned, the way the prints are displayed has much to do with how they look in his galleries.

I have been unable to find any method to achieve the same high gloss effect using inkjet materials. Pigment inks by nature have texture, and though they can appear very high gloss, they cannot equal that of Fujiflex, or Kodaks metallic for that matter.

I have tried various laminating films as well as various coatings. A process which yields very similar and stunning prints as well is Diasec, but alas inkjet prints cannot be used for this process as well.

Nick Rains · « **Reply #14 on:** July 09, 2008, 06:08:59 pm »

Quote

I have been unable to find any method to achieve the same high gloss effect using inkjet materials. Pigment inks by nature have texture, and though they can appear very high gloss, they cannot equal that of Fujiflex, or Kodaks metallic for that matter.

I have tried various laminating films as well as various coatings. A process which yields very similar and stunning prints as well is Diasec, but alas inkjet prints cannot be used for this process as well.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=206748\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Why bother? I don't know why people go to so much trouble in trying to emulate the iIfochrome or Fujiflex 'look' on inkjet. It's never going to work since the processes and materials are so different.

More importantly, Fujiflex is not even an expensive product, my Fujiflex prints cost me the same, or less, than on inkjet. It's brilliant paper and you don't have to pay the earth for it - what's not to like with that?

Wayne Fox · « **Reply #15 on:** July 10, 2008, 01:49:34 pm »

Quote

Why bother? I don't know why people go to so much trouble in trying to emulate the iIfochrome or Fujiflex 'look' on inkjet. It's never going to work since the processes and materials are so different.

More importantly, Fujiflex is not even an expensive product, my Fujiflex prints cost me the same, or less, than on inkjet. It's brilliant paper and you don't have to pay the earth for it - what's not to like with that?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=206799\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Just like printing my own stuff - can't handle sending files off to a lab anymore. I often experiment with different papers and finishes, and often have played with ways to get higher gloss with inkjet. No obsession with the look of Lik's prints ... he didn't invent the look. It's a great look, but so are many others.

Just passing on information based on my own experiences.

booksmartstudio · « **Reply #16 on:** July 10, 2008, 02:48:57 pm »

Use this:

Inkpress White gloss Film. Looks backlit.

booksmartstudio · « **Reply #17 on:** July 10, 2008, 02:50:16 pm »

it is for inkjet too. Or try the Booksmart Fine Art Metals, reflects back at you like shiny metal would.

Wayne Fox · « **Reply #18 on:** July 11, 2008, 01:49:14 pm »

Quote

Use this:

Inkpress White gloss Film. Looks backlit.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=207076\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I have tried a couple of different "films" for inkjet, and while they certainly have a unique look and indeed have a high gloss finish, they do not equal the super gloss of Fujiflex or Kodak metallic papers. I have not tried booksmart, but I would be surprised if it is much different than the other films I have tried.

If you would like to send me some, I'd be happy to check it out

booksmartstudio · « **Reply #19 on:** July 11, 2008, 02:16:39 pm »

Acutally the Booksmart Fine Art Metals are made of aluminum, you will be printing directly on the metal. It bypasses the need for metallic paper and goes directly on metal. You will get a different surface characteristic than paper or film.

Author Topic: vibrant paper (Read 19219 times)